george_on_the_outer

This is the Brereton who was quietly removed from the Hawthorn Board when Kennett arrived...... While it is easy for people to suggest there is a "formula" for winning Premierships, I think it was Old55 who noted one day ( forgive me if I am misquoting..) Would Hawthorn have won a Premiership if Richmond had selected Franklin and Roughead at the draft?

* Mr Newton does not have much time up his sleeve....there is a young kid who played in the Casey 2's on the weekend who is looking for a spot in front of goal at the higher levels. Combined with a Koorie kid in the Casey 1's who only needs to acclimatise to the AFL. * He was dragged in the final quarter as his direct opponent ran downfield to set up 2 consecutive Richmond goals. * You don't run out of puff at FF unless you do as much work as Brad Miller. His time remaining may well be measured in weeks. Was the 2 year contract just an insurance until Watts and Jurrah are available, or just that a player with a 2 year contract is tradeable at the end of year 1, instead of being lost without any compensation to the Club???

While we have heard nothing in recent times, there have been 2 major movements in the conditions since this was first talked about. 1. The MFC is now part of the MCC...so things like who pays the bills, who leases buildings etc may have had to be rejigged.. 2. The AFL has mooted a new feeder competition for the East Coast. So what happens to the VFL?. What happens to the relationship between the Scorpions and the MFC into the future? The fact that the MFC is training at Casey and that our players are representing the Scorpions is positive. It's just the business dealings into the future will have had to have been reworked.

Lies, lies and damn statistics...... Do the comparisons first people. North had 6 contested marks for the day. Fairly typical these days. That's the way the game is played. That's the way teams are coached to play...don't kick it to a contest. Result: few contested marks. Uncontested possessions Melbourne 340 North 348. Contested marking has become irrelevant.

I was watching Jake at training one day when Redleg noted why his style "looks so wrong". The kid is such a big unit he has arms which nearly reach the ground. For whatever reason, he doesn't drop the ball from a position in front of his body like most footballers. He actually drops the ball with his arms at about 45 degrees. The result is that the ball falls only a foot or so from hand to boot. It looks really weird, and has a strangely unusual effect. That is he rarely fails to kick the ball accurately. It has little opportunity to be moved by wind or other effects between hand and foot. And with such a short drop, it is rarely off-centre. It seems to take longer to execute, but for such a big bloke, having one who will hit the target consistently is unusual. The other good news about Spencer is that he has a bit of "mongrel" about him. Others who saw him at Sandy last year said he really likes hitting bodies. So while raw at this point, a tough hard at it 203cm giant who can hit a target........

Further on this....there was discussion on this yesterday on SEN with KB. Despite his claims to the contrary it was obvious that for one who is on the Rules of the game committee, that he didn't know about this rule. He was clearly horrified that it was interpreted this way despite it being written in black and white... I would just emphasise the legal point again. Maxwell has not been charged with bumping tackling or whatever, but rough play. And under that clause if contact is made to the head, then the contact is deemed negligent regardless. The only out is if the player had no other option, and he clearly didn't . The tribunal was right. The correct application of the rules as written was applied. This is a case of the law being an ass.

Sorry folks, most of you have got it wrong....the rules were changed in 2007 and I quote from the AFL Tribunal reporting process, available on the AFLPA site: Without limiting the ordinary meaning of the above words, a player shall engage in rough conduct, which in the circumstances is unreasonable, where in bumping an opponent he causes forceful contact to be made to an opponent’s head or neck. Unless intentional or reckless, such conduct shall be deemed to be negligent unless the player did not have a realistic alternative to: (a) contest the ball; (B) tackle; or © shepherd in a manner which was reasonable in the circumstances. In other words everything else ( distance from ball, accidental or not, forceful or not...) means nothing if contact is made with the head. As per the above statement and as per the Tribunal finding, because Maxwell had the opportunity to do something else, and because he made contact to the head (regardless of how ) then he is guilty. If he had not broken his opponents jaw, it is unlikely he would have been charged ( no evidence of contact ) These are the AFL rules and they are a crock.......especially when O'Hailpin can lay 2 haymakers followed by a kick to the goolies and gets a couple of weeks. Whelans bump happened before this rule change, I think.

Because each year the AFL puts far more into the Dogs than they do into us = less of a bill to pay if the Dogs don't have a sponsor than if we don't.

Interesting that he mentioned the story of the Kaditchka men. The Kaditchka man is an initiated member of the tribe whose job is to "cast" the spell which kills someone who has transgressed tribal law. Just the sight of him is enough to kill. They are covered all over with Red Ochre and wear emu feather shoes which leave no track, thereby adding to the mystique. Anyhow the story goes that at Yuendemmu everyone turned up for the footy final, with many travelling hundreds of kilometers from the surrounding district. A couple of Koori fellas drive there, but their car breaks down a few miles out of town. Rather than miss out on the match, they decide to walk the rest of the way into town. Along the red, dusty road. They finally arrive after the game has commenced, but by this time are covered from head to foot in the red bull-dust that they have had to walk through. The crowd spots them coming over the horizon and think they are Kaditchka or Red Ochre men. The spectators literally take to the bush in fear for their lives, and so do many of the players...... With the teams unable to field teams and the spectators long gone, the match is abandoned....

There are some other factors which are in play here as well.... As Casey Scorp has noted, the costs of the Olympic Park proposal is extortionate for what we get. Especially when it couldn't house our current admin staff. So it would seem Jimmy's Board is trying to work out what is best.....perhaps footy dept at OLP and admin at MCG? While I am a convert to the Casey option, it isn't up and running yet. We are to have offices built on site for the footy department and that will take time. So I'm guessing that post summer, we will return to the Junction oval, and then next year....who knows at the moment? The other thing to keep in mind is a sideline that was told to me some time ago. And that is that Journalists are a lazy bunch. They go for the easy story they are all based in the city precinct. So if you were one of them and had to get a story for tomorrows paper or tonights news where would you go?......Gee Collingwood is just down the road, not 5 minutes drive. You can see the problem if we were to move lock, stock and barrel to Casey, no matter how attractive it might seem. Since "air time" and sponsorship are the biggest earners for the club, the importance of this is not to be overlooked.

Caro would have picked up all those facts about the club by listening to Jimmy on SEN the previous evening. And even to the point of using the same words he used in her article. real journalism...please.

The AFL does not want positive drug tests. It will go to any lengths to avoid that occurring. Remember how Spider Everitt spoke out some time ago saying that he hadn't been tested since being at Sydney? Note how the AFL pays for only 600 tests per year...not even enough to get around all the players.. Have we forgotten that Ben Cousins never once tested positive despite the bleeding obvious happening at West Coast for many years? Have we forgotten the stories of the WCE party in the USA when someone nearly died? Still not a single positive.

This is the song on which the Toiyges is based. Remember it when you next hear them sing their song, will put a whole new perspective on the club and its supporters..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCkiK2pkNUg...feature=related

Wrong! This rule only applies in the first year of a contract.

This has been done to death many times before... The research is basically flawed. Take a "sample" from NSW and the answer you will get is Sydney. Why, because there is noone else to support in NSW. Does it translate to memberships? No because most people there don't give a toss about AFL. Take a "sample" in QLD and the whole state supports Brisbane. But unless they are winning Premierships, they don't get people turning up to their games. Take a "sample" in WA and most will support the Eagles. Why? Because unless you followed the variants of Fremantle in the WAFL over generations, then you will support the only other alternative. Take a "sample" in SA and you either support Port or don't. That is why Ports membership has never grown since day 1 and never will. They are the Collingwood equivalent in SA. Everyone else barracks for Adelaide, because again there are no alternatives. Take a "sample" in Victoria, and it will split among the 10 resident teams. Take a "sample" around Collingwood and guess what? Take a "sample" around Bentleigh and Melbourne would come up trumps. It is this false "support" that is driving the Western Sydney red herring. If the desire for AFL was real in Sydney, then they would have 50,000 plus members and people turning up in droves to every match. Vlad and Anderson cannot see the blindingly obvious. Regardless, Melbourne is the least supported of the Victorian clubs. However, it has one of the highest conversion rates to membership. And at the end of the day that is what gets sponsors and money into the club.

While I agree with you about VCAT and its rubber-stamping of developers proposals, I understand that in this case the Casey council made an "out of court"( because it isn't a court ) agreement with the developer. While the councils original position has been vindicated, they now bear the responsibility.

Does anyone seriously think that TJ has improved his trade value one iota from what we got for him last year? Has anyone seen the blinder of a game that would cause observers to sit up and take notice? Or the change in attitude, with a hard-work ethic? .........'fraid not..... still relying on his sublime skills and others around him to do the work. First of many good decisions made by DB since he arrived at the club.

I applaud the first evidence of some serious thinking outside the square by the club in the past 40 years! 1. If this comes off, we will have a first rate summer training facility. It is the same reason Richmond are moving to Craigieburn and St.Kilda to Frankston. 2. So we are now thinking even further outside the square...should we play games such as against Fremantle or Port at Casey.... Facts: we can only attract a crowd of 20k on a good day at the MCG against these clubs. For this we break even. we lose money if it falls below these figures. our history of playing similar games at Princes Park found us with crowds of 9k...would we get any less at Casey? we still lost money for those games, because Carlton charge extortionate rent. Windy Hill, Glenferrie, Arden st, Moorabbin, Brunswick, Junction oval don't meet AFL standards today, and are too small. we can get advertising and signage revenue at Casey, which we get nowhere today, including the MCG 9k at Casey would probably produce a profit Casey has a potential upside in future members. MCC members continue to watch games for at the MCG, with only a pittance of money coming to the MFC. Long way to go yet, but this is looking like a no brainer

I seem to recall that the profits from the Leighoak were promised in a scheme of arrangement to repay the tax department for the outstanding bill of $2M that was left in the top drawer. No small wonder that a profit hasn't been made....

Sister-in-law who lives in the area says the best value is the Safeway car park. Everywhere else is 1 hour limit....

Must apologise as I'm hundreds of miles away at the moment, and cannot access my email lists.... So for all those people who have joined the player sponsor group, there will be a get together with Clint Bartram at the Fubar in St.Kilda 7pm next Monday 19th May at 7pm I will email everyone in the group when I return later this week, but for others who have not joined we would welcome you along, have a drink with the group ( and Clint ) and get to learn the ins and outs of being an AFL listed player. Hopefully Whispering Jack can fill the blanks in on the address etc.....

Thanks to TimH and his 2 sons for signing up for 2008....and to Raymondo from WA yet again!! Welcome to Kylesut for the first time to our group...

Thanks to Whispering Jack and his 2 sons for joining the group again.....

Thanks to Nick B and Judee who have signed up for 2008

Thanks to Rachel R. and Brian & Shirley for signing up for this year.......