pitmaster

Wherever it is, he is not the answer.

As another of our hard at it midfielders, Jack Viney can be replaced, to a point. As a beast of a player who tackles with intent and effect, and as a determined and inspirational leader...well, none of the alternative "hard at it mids" quite match that, so no, he is not exactly replaceable although we can and do win without him.

Breath taking in its arrogance. And the MCC members? What were they doing all those years? An utter crock served up by CK and EM. And that's without mentioning the Cain Government which oversaw the Southern Stand rebuild by offering loan guarantees. I remember John Cain fretting over what the public would think when they realised the stand would hang over Brunton Avenue. (They hardly noticed)

Wonderful photo. Brilliant guernsey unsullied by sponsor labels. HB Ron!

Truly a waste of space, time and oxygen.

In that brief period of the 3rd where they pinched a couple of goals back they were borrowing from the slingshot from halfback style Clarkson used to slice us up a couple of years back, and actually looked like they were playing to a template for beating us, but it was not sustained and the Dees reasserted control. Other than that, I agree.

Cleanest and most consistent marking I can remember from BBB. Promising, since at the end of 2022 some here would not have been surprised not to see him again (including me). Bowey looked good apart from a couple of uncharacteristic disposal errors. Obviously Trac awesome (does he never stop going 100%?) and Oliver and Hunter looked good. Others have noted the new Mac who was incredibly impressive and Kozzie looked hot also. Petty always good and May set for a ripper year. Much to like. If I were a Saints' fan I'd be thinking about missing players and hoping for the best but fearing the worst.

Gotcha.

I embrace your passion but you are wrong on the last point. QB was our biggest money spinner for many years and would still be about so now, rivalled only by Anzac Eve..

My point is that Eddie's decision was not one of unalloyed generosity...there was a hefty dose of self-interest, but you never heard that from Eddie. We don't need to be naive mugs and think he did us some extraordinary favour solely out of the goodness of his black and white heart.

I fully empathise with you on this. I almost invariably disregard my MFC membership and sit in the MCC, on the wing, middle level, but I remember in pre-redevelopment times the atmosphere in that northern wing area comparable to where I sit now was sensational.

We must never forget that Eddie allowed us to have the QB home game AFTER the MCC rolled over for him with the deal that the Ponsford Stand would be the Pie social club at home and away games. Not so generous as it might first seem. And then, when we started pulling a crowd he wanted the home status to alternate between us.

Before the administrators reworked it my headline was "what is this clown drinking?' but you've nailed it with the toad!

“Collingwood moved from Victoria Park to the MCG and the deal Eddie McGuire and the board devised was one to support the redevelopment and the long-standing growth of the MCG. We were the founding tenant club and we brought all our members across,” Kelly said. Rival clubs fume at Collingwood’s hold on MCG seats

Way to go...one leads into the other.

Very interesting observation re training at Casey. The good element of that fact is that no-one can sling off that we only win flags on our home ground which was the old criticism. But when it comes to impact of training venues your point is thought provoking at least. Of course, the football department says Casey is great and training out there is no disadvantage, but to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies: "They would say that, wouldn't they?"

I can imagine the envy on our players' faces when they turn up to RSEA Park on Friday for a practice match and they cop a close up view at the facilities the Saints are creating at their home. I was down there a couple of weeks ago and it's damn impressive. You can all take a look on Friday arvo and think about what might have been. Yes I understand confidentiality and stake holder consultations, but the lack of progress is one glaring red dot on our four year strategy. When the result came in I scored two out of three on board appointments. I can't help thinking we missed an opportunity for a fresh approach with the vote tonight. There's a sameness about our board - corporate backgrounds in finance, management, law, accounting...but I don't see anything in government ties and Reed might have been that. I did note (before my feed cut out) that Kate referred to her "friend" Tim Pallas. Perhaps she was trying to tell us something but adding a professional in the field of government liaison would not be a bad thing. The board could do worse than swallow its pride and see what Reed has to offer in some other capacity.

Give it another 26 hours or so.

Like everyone else here, I am happy for anything that might disturb Collingwood’s preparation but those hoping it will derail their season are kidding themselves. Ginnivan is an attention seeking, cheating s&&@head but he’s a small 1-2 goal forward. His impact on the game is nowhere near as great as the attention he gets for being a knee/dropping peroxided brat. There’s nowhere in his game the forward pressure impact that Spargs and Kossie have for us. if he didn’t play for the Pies and cheat so blatantly we wouldn’t know his name.

Footy website themongrelpunt has reviewed Between The Flags and says "this one is the book you want as a die-hard Melbourne supporter". Check out the full review here: https://themongrelpunt.com/footy-history/2023/02/17/mongrel-book-review-between-the-flags-making-sense-of-57-years-of-heartache/

Ah yes, a sweet memory. Thank you for that.

Benny can't help himself but that smirking host should be ashamed of himself for exploiting the poor bugger. Absolute creep. Notice the frequent knowing glances off camera.

Forgive me for venting but I strayed on to Big Footy this morning and found myself reading a thread on the Hawks forum with the headline ‘Why is Hawthorn so great’? As exercises in self delusion it can’t be beaten. I wanted to answer it, but turns out I don’t have reply rights on BF so I am letting rip here. They make a few points but all annoying. Here goes: Anyone alive has seen more Hawthorn premierships than any other (13 - this much is true); the Coodabeens used to have a joke that the Grand Final was the final match of the year when someone played Hawthorn. Elsewhere they bang on about St Kilda having no right to try to establish a stronger presence in the south east because that is Hawthorn territory. Anyone who has read Between The Flags would know how much of this is self-serving BS. Hawthorn’s presence in the south east, and eight of those 13 premierships are in large part due to the introduction of country zoning in 1967. St Kilda was the sole inhabitant of the south east when country zones came in and was counting on being assigned the Mornington Peninsula but the Saints were premiers at the time and Hawthorn, well Hawthorn was rubbish and bumbling about in the bottom third of the ladder, so luckily, or suspiciously, Hawthorn was assigned the talent-rich MP- West Gippsland zone that the Saints had prepared for by moving to Moorabbin. They also boast of having voted - “unlike that other mob” - to have opposed a merger, and again, any who has read Between The Flags knows that is a misreading of what happened. The truth is, we were once like them. Melbourne originally had one great advantage in recruiting, which was the fact we played at the best ground in the state, probably the nation. For a quarter of a century we made the most of it, then times changed. Hawthorn likewise had one great advantage, their amazing country zone and good luck to them, they made the most of it. But its’ infuriating that they think their success is down to their own virtue. I know I made that same mistake about us. On another matter, they also sling off at St Kilda trying to increase its presence in the south east because that is “Hawthorn territory”. See paragraph four above to understand the falseness of that self-delusion. So I’ll pose another question: Why are Hawthorn supporters so full of it? All contributions gratefully accepted.

True. Also, a club needs a headquarters to encompass a Hall of Fame where it can tell is own story on its own terms. Collingwood are regularly changing their foyer displays in order to highlight some part of their history as well as staging permanent displays. Melbourne could have a profound display, for example, to correspond with Anzac Day given the history of Truscott, Ball, Anderson and others. We could also tell the story of the emergence of women's football better than any other club given our pioneering role. The themes are endless. Carlton and Essendon both display 16 premiership cups at their homes, and it looks brilliant. We need something similar whether its 13, 14 or however many cups and the wonderful old pennants from the 1940s and 50s.

Once again an ill-thought-out AFL sponsored rule change triggers unintended consequences and is rapidly scrapped/modified/reinterpreted due to the creative ways of coaches and players. It is both amusing and predictable. It's a sensible change if you want 'stand' to stand, but really, who needed 'stand' in the first instance? Oh, and the protected area rule? I'm with DD. Scrap it.