Whispering_Jack

Demonland is a supporters forum which is there for all supporters to let off steam from time to time (as I just did when I kicked the thread about the International Rules farce off the footy message board to the other sports board). That means they're allowed to get things off their chests even if they happen to be negative. However, I agree with what you say about the defeatist attitude of some supporters. The only way you ever win in any sport or any undertaking is if you go into it with a positive attitude.

As Mike Williamson once said - "I tipped this!" What I didn't tip was the bold faced hypocritical utterances from the AFL's apparatchik on the subject of the draw. Things like, "it's a good football draw for Melbourne" and the comment that Collingwood has only one less interstate trip than the average. A good football draw is the programme the AFL handed to Collingwood which plays each of last year's grand finallists once after playing Geelong once last year (at the G). And they never play the cats at Skilled Stadium where there is a genuine home ground advantage. As for Collingwood having to travel interstate one time less than the avergae club that might well be true but it happens every year. Why can't they play out of metropolitan Melbourne one time more than the average for once? When Ian Collins ran the Kremlin AFL he used to have a saying when questioned about irregularities in the draw that "what goes around, comes around". The problem was that when the time came around everyone forgot and we got the same line again and again but nothing ever came around. The current crowd don't even bother telling that lie any more.

Nah, not singing and not from the same sheet when it comes to the issue of breach of contract and, assuming what I've heard is true and correct, I'd back the football club on this one if it got to court (which it won't because, as Deeman pointed out, that option enriches only the lawyers and would not benefit either party). The conclusion therefore, is always going to be the same whichever way you look at it - it's not in the interests of either the MFC, Carroll, the AFL or the AFLPA that the contract remains on foot. In the end, all that matters is the size of the pay out cheque.

Beg to differ. AFL player contracts are pretty much standard these days and require players to uphold certain standards of conduct and behaviour. It's not a question of whether the club has a case against Carroll but more a question of the politics surrounding the matter. Nobody wants this to erupt into a costly legal proceeding, least of all the AFL which holds the key in respect to such matters as what happens with regard to Melbourne's TPP is Carroll is terminated. It's a minefield and the club has to navigate it carefully. The main thing is that in the end Carroll will not be at the MFC in 2009.

I know Ossie well from his involvement over the years with the Sandringham Dragons. He has been the main man with that club from its inception in the first year of the TAC Cup in 1992 when they were known as the Central Dragons (and later the Prahran Dragons). To hold one job in such a responsible position for so long is something rare in this game. He would also have a fairly deep knowledge of how young footballers think and act and I daresay he would have some inside knowledge on a youngster named Jack Watts.

gOLLY, your PM inbox is full. If you clear it out there's a message waiting.

I wouldn't be surprised if Hislop has been delisted by Essendon with the intention of redrafting him as a rookie. His career appears to have been derailed a bit after he suffered some injuries. Interestingly, Matt Burgan of afl.com.au had him slated to be selected with Melbourne's first selection in the 2006 National Draft:-

Let's not jump to any hasty conclusions about this or any player's off field proclivities. There's been a long discussion on Hislop on Bomber Blitz here. Judge for yourself whether you want him.

Why not think laterally and instead of fighting this Grand Prix thing, we should get together with the organisers and cross-promote both events with a racing theme for the game, special ticket deals and sponsorships, transport to Albert Park after the game etc. Don't we have something in common with the Grand Prix? I'm assuming that Ron Walker is still involved with the GP and he is also a Melbourne supporter? The club could do well out of this situation (and I still haven't given up the Ferrari sponsorship deal as well - it would make a good fit with the Ferrari colours matching our own alternate strip more or less).

Biff was good but he wasn't in Buddy's class. He would have been our best bet to stop him though because he was physically very strong and wasn't afraid to employ some roughhouse tactics. A strike or two (or even three) from Big Biff would have been enough to put him down for the count. Wouldn't work these days with video scrutiny and all that.

Pretty sure it is our "home" game and I don't mind it being against North Melbourne. The first game of the season usually draws better numbers because supporters want to see the new players and how the younger players are developing. There's usually a fair amount of optimism around the place and the people usually turn up. North don't draw crowds even when they're doing well so imagine if we were drawn to play North in our home game in Round 10 and they were 2-7?

News up here on the Gold Coast is that Carlton, St. Kilda and Richmond will each be given on lucrative "home" game at Carrara to replace North Melbourne which no longer wants to host any games there. Melbourne will be one of the "visitors" when it plays the Saints in a game up here next year. AFL chief operating officer Gillon McLachlan confirmed that the Brisbane Lions would not be involved in any of these games and according to the Gold Coast Bulletin - Now, I wonder if the same principle will apply to Melbourne's "home" game to be played in Canberra next year or will the AFL throw neutrality out of the window and give Sydney the home state advantage for this fixture once again?

Shouldn't be allowed anywhere near AAMI Stadium that mob. If they can't average more than 25k per game they can make them play in the middle of the racetrack at Morphetville on a Monday during lunch break.

45. Matthew Whelan [180cm 84 kg 13.11.79 - 140 games (12 in 2008), 14 goals (1 in 2008)] – injuries restricted Melbourne's best small back man to just 12 games and his presence was greatly missed by the inexperienced defence.

But like "Nafe", Bell and Dunn are also contracted players aren't they? If that's the case, delisting either of them to get an extra choice even in a deep draft doesn't seem right either. It might just be best if the FD think the draft is deep to keep Aussie and Shane as rookies for at least another half season (or less if we have any long term injuries) to maximise our results in the drafts.

It's coming soon to a place near you.

Meanwhile, down at Casey - FORMER North Melbourne player Peter German has emerged as a contender to coach Casey Scorpions. Follows Greg Hutchison's decision to remain with the Saints. Also Chris Connolly was part of a meeting organised with prospective Casy recruits for 2009 and assured all that the Casey deal was going ahead. Although our own discussions with Beach Road Bazza's son KC to become our regular Casey correspondent next year are also going along slowly, we're 99% sure he's committed. Those who wish to help with compiling reports for future Casey games - please PM me.

Isn't there a new airline coming here from Qatar? After watching their soccer team play tonight I would have thought we would make a good fit with that organisation.

My bet's still on him continuing his relationship with Geelong. They have been looking after him for a some time and I heard Neil Balme talking on radio about him in glowing terms a while ago - didn't sound as if they were going to give him up very easily.

We can't even drip on their parade in this instance. The kid is a NSW scholarship player and Geelong has first call on his services and can automatically rookie list him. We, on the other hand have neglected this area in the past because of a lack of funds so while many clubs have up to 4 NSW boys on their lists, we have one - and he didn't even make the NSW final squad of 25 for the Under 18 champs this year (although he his eligible again by a few days next year).

Err, umm ... you're quite welcome to try but I think you should know we traded you to Carlton for their pick # 104.

Oops ... but it does show you the intense dedication and love of the Demons by the family. As for this big danny g. I'm not endorsing any tough physical action whatsoever. The tactic will be the same one we used successfully earlier in the year against Saintsational's gun player. We'll assign someone to smother him with love and kisses.

This is the new draft order after the trades. The order will change in the lower rounds once the number of selections for each club is determined after final delistings and rookie elevations. Round One - 1. Melbourne 2. West Coast 3. Fremantle 4. Port Adelaide 5. Essendon 6. Carlton 7. Brisbane 8. Richmond 9. North Melbourne 10. Adelaide 11. Collingwood 12. Sydney 13. St. Kilda 14. Western Bulldogs (Ayce Cordy – father/son) 15. Geelong 16. Hawthorn Priority Round - 17. Melbourne 18. West Coast Round Two - 19. Melbourne 20. West Coast 21. Fremantle 22. Port Adelaide 23. Essendon 24. Fremantle 25. Brisbane 26. Richmond 27. North Melbourne 28. Adelaide 29. Collingwood 30. Sydney 31. Western Bulldogs 32. Western Bulldogs 33. Geelong 34. Hawthorn Round Three - 35. Melbourne 36. West Coast 37. Fremantle 38. Port Adelaide 39. Geelong 40. Carlton 41. Brisbane 42. Port Adelaide 43. North Melbourne 44. Adelaide 45. Collingwood 46. Collingwood 47. St. Kilda 48. St Kilda 49. Geelong 50. Hawthorn Round Four - 51. Melbourne 52. West Coast 53. Fremantle 54. Port Adelaide 55. Essendon 56. Fremantle 57. Brisbane 58. Richmond 59. North Melbourne 60. Adelaide 61. Sydney 62. Sydney 63. St. Kilda 64. Western Bulldogs 65. Geelong 66. Hawthorn Round Five - 67. Melbourne 68. West Coast 69. Carlton 70. Port Adelaide 71. Essendon 72. Fremantle 73. Brisbane 74. Richmond 75. North Melbourne 76. Adelaide 77. Collingwood 78. Sydney 79. St. Kilda 80. Western Bulldogs 81. Geelong 82. Hawthorn Round Six - 83. Melbourne 84. West Coast 85. Fremantle 86. Port Adelaide 87. Essendon 88. Carlton 89. Brisbane 90. Richmond 91. North Melbourne 92. Adelaide 93. Brisbane 94. Sydney 95. St. Kilda 96. Western Bulldogs 97. Geelong 98. Hawthorn

WOW. The past catches up with us all. Lively political discussion about the Szondy-Gutnick confrontation, a fair bit of personal abuse (where were the mods then?) and this gem from Deebest commenting on Spunjy's (now Axis of Bob) draft preview:- Well, history shows that we didn't take Del Santo at #9 but took Luke Molan instead and while D S might be criticised for a few aspects of his play, I don't think we should have worried about his height or lack thereof. And just a little quiz - in the same draft, Melbourne selected a player who went on to play in a premiership team. Who was he?

The book's fantastic. Well written and moves along at a nice pace. I'm trying to read it while reading another heavier book so it creates a nice balance. And High Tower, it's great to be sitting out in the glorious sunshine and doing nothing else but readin and having a nice cool drink. Cheers