Flying Cloud

Presume they chose Sorrento because there is a large enough place for them all get together for the night, it is relaxing, and they have training at Casey Fields this morning (closed session), which is only an hour away.

It may turn out later this year that there is a relaisation that we do need to make changes. That may be at the Board, Admin or the Footy Dept. There may be a need to make a couple of changes. But can we please do it in a controlled and well thought through manner. Mass sackings will not improve the teams on field success.

Exactly.

Think an email is a good idea, but don't ask for a response, in fact state you don't want a personal response. I would much prefer the staff at the club concentrate on supporting the team, than writing individual responses to every email they receive. Edit: spelling

No they should not. If you look closely at the teams that win premierships of late they are the ones who have had stability at the top. We need to rally around the club and the team and support them. There have been just as insipid performances from Geelong and Collingwood in the not too distant past, They are where they are now because they have had stability. I also repeat what I have said in the past, and call on others, to not vote against the current board until, and unless, those on this board who regularly are overly critical of the incumbents, satte their names and any affiliations they have with anyone challenging for the board.

I'd be [censored] if I was Buddy, when the best that GWS can offer is $1.3M, less than Israel Folau and a tad more than Scully!

The Ox said he was going to head but him. I would pay big bucks to see that!

Bit of a touchy one for me after I lost it at a Collingwood supporter sitting a couple of rows in front of me in the reserved seating a few years back. I don't mind at all if other club's fans sit in the Melbourne seats, however I do feel it is up to the them to recognise where they are sitting and be good natured* about their support of their team. * By good natured I mean if they are winning just clapping goals and good play, not jumping around and rubbing Melbourne supporters faces in it, and if they are losing then to accept some ribbing. Double standards I know but is the price of sitting in a Melbourne area. Tickets do say "Not Transferable".

Heard a spokesman for one of the other clubs the other day, may have been Norf. He was saying one of the measures they were looking at was a percentage at the end of the year of greater than 100%. Makes sense really, means you are winning more than you are losing, and when yo do lose you are not being thrashed.

Could always park at Cranbourne Station (or there-abouts) and catch the bus! Or you could wait for the Labor Party to keep their promise and build the extension to Cranbourne East.

Mark Jackson Joke!

If the VCGLR investigation interviews CW and decide they need the names of her sources will she: Forget her journalistic standards and dob them in (will be interesting reading), or Uphold her standards and go to jail.

The ASADA boss on radio the other day said they don't apply penalties but pass recommendations to the relevant sporting body. So the AFL would have to apply the recommended penalties.

Decisions by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor are subject to judicial review. First they would need to find against us, the it would go to VCAT and then up and up. This may well be some more heart-ache for the club, but in the end to find any of the board members unfit to hold a gaming licence is, in my humble opinion, so remotely unlikely that I think I may just hold off on reading this thread!

In somewhere between 40% and 70% of games of Australian Rules Footy, from my son's under 10s to AFL Grand Final's there comes a point where it is obvious who is going to win. Many times the team that is clearly going to lose drops their intensity, and then often so does the team that is going to win. Sometimes this is with 2 minutes to go. Sometimes with a quarter to go. Sometimes it is before the game. Does that mean the inevitable losers are trying to lose? NO. It just means that sometimes there are other ways of getting something out of the game. All those saying we tanked - well really you have no idea unless you were a coach or a player. All those saying we didn't tank - same applies. Biggest issue is tanking is not defined in AFL rules, and so this is truly a Breaker Morant moment for the game and for the AFL. Note - I use the Breaker Morant example as a historic presendent and not in any way to suggest that AFL players should be compared to the sacrifice made by those who have fought for our country.

Watched the abbreviated version, but can't stand to watch again. She definitely crossed her arms, but then I think she actually denied that she had. That just makes her a plain liar in the most ridiculous of ways,

To quote Nelson Muntz... Ha Ha

The AFL has no law against tanking. They have other specific rules. lets see which ones they are charging us with.

the AFL has in regard to the recent drugs scandal suggested working closer with the police. I doubt the police would want to work with an organisation that leaks like the AFL does.

I get that, but there has been plenty of rule changes since 2009, they could have brought one in since then.

If tanking is so disgusting, why hasn't the AFL created a specific rule to address it?

My observation is The Age has moved its position, and that they have lowered their standards to the point where there is little difference in the quality of work by either of the major Melbourne papers.

As a now current sponsor, I reckon we could call them HS, the small paper, or something. Don't bite the hand that feeds etc.....

How about all cleared of draft tampering, the club cleared of all charges, CC charged with game in disrepute and a suspended sentence for his poor comment. May be worth copping.

There are a range of possibilities about who he was talking to. The board has some smart cookies on it. Perhaps he was "speaking to the converted", perhaps the general footbal public, perhaps the AFL executive, perhaps the commission? He ceratinly wasn't talking to CW. I would be very confident that DM is clever enough to know who his audience is when he speaks on important issues. I doubt a sports jounalist, even a Chief Football Writer, would understand this, and even if she did, would not let it get in the way of adhering to management's directives in regard to ensuring articles written are able to compete with the oppositions.