Deemania since 56

Both playing full-time in the AFL team, in tandem with one another, would be everyone's ideal provided that both displayed that kind of forward craft that was consistently excellent and prominently rewarding for the whole team. We do have the 'smalls' and the 'not-so-smalls' posted around the hot zones in our progress to - and within - the entire forward roster so, in all likelihood, it could be a fantastic asset where youth and skill abound. In any case, Carna Dees!

BB played less gametime (around one-third) in the VFL Casey team due to recovery from injury and time-proven resting strategies to ensure a fast heal from that which ailed him. Alongside this recuperation, the intensity of his game was naturally restricted to prevent a set-back in his AFL preparation. One must expect, under these circumstances in operation at the time, that Brown's contribution was restricted and could not be reasonably compared to that of another forward with so much additional gametime and intent, without a potentially limiting need to take care with a recuperation injury, without a limit placed on joint exertion and dynamics. As it is in the present moment, it was time that Weed began producing some form in the VFL team. He has had five years to achieve consistency and improved performance upon which the team and supporters could rely.

This worries me, as well. Can we afford such patience? Just look at the potential that our forward 'team' offers without even thinking of the Weed. It is enormous, both in the air, on the ground, around the ground, and out-and-about for the ball. Then there is the capacity for renewed forward pressure acts against opposition defenders who got lucky. Then there is the increasing capacity for our smaller fleet to unleash havoc with opposition structures and strategies simply due to their mobility and teamwork.

This probably depends on how the umpires observe his play relative to the attention he receives from opponents to put him off his game. Tough little nut in terms of bashings received. Same for Gawn and Fritta. Focus coud also be placed on the holding that is experienced by Clarrie before - well before - he even gets to the ball. I'd agree that in terms of Pickett's overall conditioning, a rest is perhaps soon due.

In Harmes, there is a bit of a tuff-nut against sides that huddle and break. His shepherding work is seldom seen overtly, but it is classy and effective, creating screens and handballing options for other Demon players. Harmes can use his body well, is difficult to stop when apace with the ball and has what can now be regarded as 'good experience'. It would be great if he could return to form and consistency.

A super-talented Demon shaping as a legend for the Club, like Robbie. Does the heart good.

When innocence has been convicted and badly labelled, sometimes the truthful road must be travelled by wiser heads. We - of the Wiseheads - rejoice. DL was an instrumental agency in this process of rectifying a very poor decision. Well done, folks.

Totally irresponsible oversight by the MRO.

Absolutely true, monoccular. Can we expect a continuing rise in its frequency? There appears to be several additional approaches to such a manoeuvre developing: front on, sidewards to the direct lateral advantage of the snot goblin, the good old wrap your opponent's arm and wrist about your neck where you reckon, as you fall deliberately and gently assunder, the umpire will get the best view of any alleged tackling brutality (courtesy of Selwood's mastery plans), and simply, just lead with your ducking head (I repeat, 'ducking head') into the possessor of the ball. Each of the above that I have noticed seem to work just fine. Another poorly thought-out rule from the AFL with a twist in variability.

Tend to agree on this. I see a bright opportunity with the way Chandler is playing in the Casey team, as well. His on-ground work is very good and he leaves another effective pathway for the forwards to receive. He could be useful as a Viney replacement or to assist Sparrow (if he comes in) in developing that avenue.

...and thus, a new means of cheap frees in front of goal has emerged. Just duck into a contact that hopefully will be head high.

Read again....increasing the speed of a moving body (that has a certain mass) sees that mass increase proportionately.

I thought Baker played fairly well. His pace was quite noticeable but in particular, I liked to the way, once or twice, he used that pace to increase his mass, charging through a forming pack to get the ball and, due to that paced approach, was largely unstoppable by the North opposition. Courageious, yes; effective, certainly. HIs ball disposal when passing forward was good to very good; low, fast, accurate and covered good distance so his eyes were up and his intent subtley masked. A better effort from him - that's for sure. Nah, didn't want to get his hair wet with sugary syrups and similar concoctions.

Nah, didn't want to get his hair wet with sugary syrups and similar concoctions.

The Swans at the G? There's going to be a good deal of space on the flanks - particularly HFwd and Hback. I think we are going to need Swallow and Melksham for entry and exploitation of these pathways as runners, and also as key links to forward deliveries.

His natural distress was an indication of his sincerity towards the Club and his teammates. In response, the Team won the game in his honour.

Can you put a figure on that?

That took a while...but remains irrelevant... but we all agree; well, at least 90% of us might.

The first person who suggests I am talking about 1/12th wins the daily prize.So if you round that to 3 decimal places, as a percentage it roughly equates to 9.167%.

It's very much like the agonists amongst us, and the Filth's supporters who collectively know five-eights of two-fifteenths of far call.

Abso-bldy-lutely!!!

Now why did I not consider that? Of course, a good plan that I failed to realise ....

Gawny, in the first quarter, copped three free haymakers from behind from North, each on the right temple of his head. Two in a pack mark where one North player went for the ball, the other behind Gawn not going for the ball at all - just to provide a fist to the head to interfere with that play (Gawn about to outmark the bloke in front) and to initiate or establish a 'weakened' Gawn game for the rest of the match. Another two were also delivered to ensure Gawn was kept quiet by non-footballing means in that same quarter; one on the ground scramble with the umpire well behind / out of vision and another, in a recovery from a Gawn/Goldstein ruck duel. Again, by these blows were deliberate, appeared planned and delivered by a non-participant in the contest coming in from the side. It almost seems as if the umpires require some prescription spectacles when it comes to Max Gawn. It also seems to be a coaching directive, in more ways than one, from more and more clubs that we play. All OK, obviously, say the snot goblins with the power of the whistle and the ineptitude of the incorrect decision. How, and when, are the umpires/AFL going to reduce this blight on the game. Mongrel is about winning the footy by using footy protocols and maintaining such an effort. It is not about surreptitious attempts to maim.

Another really good test for Baker - if he is the one to replace Viney (although Chandler might have been handy but played the last match with Casey Thurs night). Baker needs another test or two as his genuine pace gives us a three-pronged, full ground speedway (Hunt, 'Baker', Kozzie/Spargo) that is very handy for spacemakers. Enjoy the game, folks. We have got this one.

That would be a shame, but I think it is a difficulty (should it occur) that we can overcome, such is our depth.