Skuit

2013: "Sellar bags five as Demons open pre-season account!!!" https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/sellar-bags-five-as-demons-open-preseason-account-20130303-2fely.html

On second thoughts, the original snap is resplendent with inherent religious iconography. I call this new piece, 'The father, the son, and the holy GOAT': Or, 'Gawn's creation of Luke'.

Noticed kid-Pickett was often in good position on the weekend but hardly ever called for the ball, sometimes with his head down or looking in another direction. Was overlooked on a couple of occasions as well (Tomald) despite being the obvious option. If he nailed that second shot I suspect he would have popped up for one or two more. Club needs to find a way to jack up his confidence pronto, and let his natural mojo come to the fore. I have no idea what the immediate solution might be. You can offer someone licence but it doesn't mean they will grab it. Perhaps if we gave him the simple target of taking x number of shots per match or x number of runs? - the threat of an odd sidestep can disrupt the defence even without kicking for goal.

We talking legs or kegs here?

Latest edition of Adobe Creative Suite out of Cambodia actually, but you're forgiven nonetheless.

I did some quick calculations and came up with this handy reference guide below.

I was probably a bit unfair on Tomald, considering the circumstances, and nearly had a small breakdown when I thought I saw him take off his shoe. Like when he was at CHB though, he needs to reminded that being a play-maker isn't a required part of his role. As for Brown - I don't want to be too disparaging, but his goals weren't particularly well-crafted. One was courtesy of a soft free kick (and he gave away a few after that), and another was a fairly ugly dribbler that was lucky to go through. He also missed an easy set-shot. I think he could well be the type of player to quietly contribute a couple goals per game, but I'm not sure if goal average is much of a metric used by footy clubs nowadays. We're crying out for a forward with a strong marking presence, and I'm afraid he's not it. Rather than a 22-gamer as some were declaring early on, I think if he's being selected - as was mentioned at the time of his recruitment - then we probably have some serious problems. Right now I would go with an extra medium ahead of Brown as a second key.

Max Gawn probably the only captain in recent times to joke about drinking his own urine at the press announcement. He's already taking the pizz.

I doubt you would have been impressed had you watched Old Dee. I'd probably be classified as one of themanjordan's happy-clappers but I wasn't particularly buoyed by yesterday's showing, bar Petracca's genuine break-out performance. While the usual pre-season qualifications apply, so many of our recent limitations were still clearly on display, collectively and in regards to certain individuals. This was most apparent with our forward-half play, marked by inefficiency and bombing (the latter which can be a symptom of the forwards as much as the mids). While others would agree in their hearts, I doubt this will be a popular post. Weid to me showed no signs that he's ready to take strong, confident grabs or get himself into space. Tomald was completely absent for the most part and his usual galumphing self when finally involved. Brown's goals were junk against an inexperienced opponent. Melksham was off the pace and uninvolved. As that's at least half of our primary targets, I feel we that may have a problem. Meanwhile, Jackson isn't ready up forward, and if we need him to be, then I feel like we shouldn't be developing him in three positions at once. Pickett was busy in flashes, but still needs to develop his confidence and stamina. And while our renewed forward pressure was pleasing, Goody credited this to ANB and Spargo - who otherwise seem both completely pointless and unlikely to hit the scoreboard themselves. Alongside Gawn, I think we clearly missed Fritsch the most. This to me is a concern. Around half our goals came from Petracca, Jones, Langdon and Sparrow from the middle or half-back. I like their contribution, but not the balance. Our 2018 semi-final win over Hawthorn for example saw at least two thirds of our goals scored by full-time forwards. Let's see what happens in Marsh number 2.

Quite right (and this is exactly the help I was after). I just took KK16's lead in his original post. Anderson makes much more sense (as I overlooked/didn't include him elsewhere). Although it has some value, the previous major Demonland update made it so original posts couldn't be adjusted/edited after a certain time-frame. Consider Anderson at 5, and Robertson down in that group from 13 to 16 - based on him being available at the time of Pickett's selection but still evidently above Rivers. Edit: I was able to adjust the table. Cheers for your catch.

If I can find the time, I'm going to rank the draft 'winners and losers' from the MFC's perspective according to this table. Clearly a nerd at heart. But I'm also super-cool because I will be traveling extensively over the next month (alert to any of our sexpats in Thailand and Southeast Asia, let me know where the best spot is to watch our games), so would appreciate any other OCD help in this regard. I may rank it somehow according to draft value points. E.g. Fremantle scored Young at 7 (1644), who was 4th on our list (2044): so a 390-point bump, or equivalent of pick 42 (according to this calculator: https://www.draftguru.com.au/pick-value-calculator). Green was ranked at 3 and taken at 10: an 839 point bonus equivalent to pick 23. Minus Anderson, who by our reckoning they lost 639 points on. Due to the black-spots on the list, it will be far from definitive.

So, our 2019 draft board. Or at least a partial picture from October. This list is compiled courtesy of a snap-shot taken from our latest ‘To Hell and Back’ episode. Hats off to @KK16 for the sharp eyes. He’ll be a useful viewing companion for the upcoming season of Westworld. Provisos: This is not a quarrel: I’m happy with who we got. It’s just a useful fact-check reference for posterity, to combat the likely future speculation/revisionism al a Josh Kelly. There are also some intriguing mysteries still to resolve. Still, I expect at least some posters will say ‘move on’. It may be that this was an accidental leak of club IP – in which case there’s an argument it should be taken down. I don’t want to hurt the club. But I don’t however think it matters, or should matter if we’re serious. Regardless, it’s already forever now in the public domain, and may not even be a mistake. At the very least, we got everyone we wanted above where they were rated. Lastly: we were drafting in part for needs – so this isn’t a definitive ranking of who we considered the best players, just who we would take in order a month prior to the draft. Judging by this preliminary board and who was available at which stage on the night demonstrates that there was at least a little bit of movement before the draft. Ultimately, it’s hard to place Pickett and those around him, as there were other practicalities involved and his worth in the end was effectively bundled with a high second-round pick. There may be some errors in my deductions and placements. Final selection numbers are in brackets. 1 Rowell (1) 2 Jackson (3) 3 Green (10: academy) 4 Young (7) 5 Anderson (2) ……………......... Not visible: 6 7 8 (*traded out) 9 10 11 ..................... Players off the board at the eventual time of Pickett’s selection included Ash / Stephens / Serong / Henry (academy) / and Flanders. We moved down two spots prior to the draft, so (without factoring in pragmatism etc.) we rated Pickett-plus higher than at least some of these players or the possibility of any. 12 (Pickett-plus taken) Players still available at that selection not visible on the board elsewhere: Day / Weightman / Kemp / Georgiades / Dow / Robertson. We also took Rivers ahead of B. Smith, who was ranked at 18 on our early board – indicating that Rivers was in this group. Robertson, judging by draft night footage, was ranked ahead of Rivers. 13 14 15 16 17 ……………. 18 B. Smith (33) 19 De Koning (19) 20 MCasey (6) 21 Schoenberg (24) 22 Gould (26) 23 Bergman (14) 24 Worrell (28) 25 Maginness (29: father/son) 26? (there a few unreadable names on the board in red, including here, which somewhat disrupts some of the deductions made from the list). 27 Mead (25: father/son) 28 C. Stephens? (16) ..................... Another part of the board not visible and a strange gap at 32. Some players in this rough range not visibly featured elsewhere on our board (and where they were ultimately taken) – note: there may be some errors here – include Jones, 30, Perez, 35, Taylor, 36, Coleman, 37 (academy), Evans, 41, O’Conner, 42, Martyn (academy), 44, and Bianco, 46. 29 30 31 32 (strange gap) 33 34 …………........ 35 Cumberland (43 academy) 36 Sparkes (not selected) A wingman, Sparkes was also overlooked at our pick 2 in the rookie draft. Rowels (52 – taken at 4 in the rookie draft) was another player selected early in the rookie draft who was on our board to pick 61 (there’s another strange gap from 62 to 68). .................... 37 Byrnes (52) 38 Rantall (40) 39 Philp (20) 40 J. Sharp (27) 41 Comben (31) 42 Jamieson (49) ……………....... Some remaining mysteries: The strange gaps. Also, the colour-key. Dark blue seems to indicate father-son; orange/light blue (striped with club colours?) maybe ‘academy’. I think it’s actually a mix. There’s also a white border around some of these and not others. Red, I have no idea. Another mystery is the overall green/yellow and then white pattern. It seems to be groupings, but Taheny, at 61 on our board (the last spot before the gap), is rendered in yellow, as is Rowell at 1. Then next to some of the players are ‘traffic lights’ in orange, white and green – hard to make sense of these at all. Would love if other posters could contribute to sort out the errors and fill in some of the mysteries with fresh eyes.

While this is far from solid evidence (and makes no difference now), the narrator states that they gathered in Rye a month prior to the national draft (after GC had received their concessions) and 'currently hold picks 3 and 8'. Coupled with the draft board above it seems probable that Rowell was one overall and Jackson moved ahead of Green into two at some stage. Curious is the phrase re. Green that they've had him at two 'at times', rather than 'previously' - suggesting there was other fluctuation.

I hadn't thought of this. But I'm still not sure if they were referring to our pick or not. The gathering in Rye was mentioned at the time somewhere on these boards, which would provide a timeline and answer.

It seems more like Jackson and Green were alternating at two. It could be that only one of Rowell or Anderson were in number one spot. Or that they were both scratched from the list and someone else was at one.

I don't think this is accurate, Jackson in the video was described as number 2 on the list and Green had been at number 2 'at times' (in a positive sense). Hence they didn't show discussion of our number 1 interest. Could have been anyone.

I don't have anything to add but just wanted my turn at typing Petracca's name.

Still the Central? I'm seen many a glorious victory there, as well as a few horrible defeats dating back before the big-screens: including our 2000 prelim win over the Roos, and our crazy 2002 finals loss against the Crows.

Haha. I'm not a Boomer but I still have no idea. I was born in the brief border years between Gen X and the Millennials: most of us are clueless about both camps. We're also mostly all broke for getting caught in between: hence no spare Kayo cash. I had the Watch AFL subscription last year, but paying to get up at 5am in the morning for a couple hours of regular humiliation always felt rather harsh, regardless of my bdsmfc tendencies.

All these draft concessions are a perfect analogy for capitalism. Somehow you know the whole system is corrupt, but your own small hand-outs are enough to keep you from complaining about system. We got Viney for cheap, but where else have we really benefited compared to all the other clubs?

Cheers FND. But I have no idea if any of that means the match will be live-streamed for free or not. I'm currently overseas, but will probably be in your hood around the time of our first real fixture: where's the best place up north nowadays to watch the real stuff?

Lazy post/can't be bothered with the leg-work. Is the match going to be streamed somewhere?

Yes. The idiocy of my comment probably wasn't apparent by virtue of its idiotic extent. I just saw Weid's name to the left on the followers-line and assumed he was named as a mid. Seems I forgot we don't have any other ruckmen, and also forgot to check who how ruck actually was. Jumped to the conclusion that we were about to unleash our new two-metre mid sensation. Either A) I'm free MFCSS and have ignored most of our inconsequential injury reports. Or B) Am riddled with MFCSS and just accepted that Weid would start as mid to cover injuries.

A meaningless team-sheet for a mostly meaningless game. But Weideman in the centre is curious. Is it possible that they're intending to try some sort of rotation between Weid, Jackson and Brown, with Jackson to get a run through the middle?

Demonland: I hope we don't have too many players selected for the State of Origin match. Demonland: I'm outraged that Clayton Oliver wasn't selected for the State of Origin match.