PJ_12345

Magner for me always seems to put that extra 10% than most of our listed players. 10% harder when running, 10% harder at attacking the footy/man and 10% more pressure. Sure he can muck it up sometimes but that's what I'm hoping this year can sort out for him. I put it down to that he was in the draft 7 times till we picked him up, and trying to earn his keep. Id rather that attitude any day of the week in our list, even if it comes with a bit less skill.

We went with Evans this year, leaving us with Toumpas, Viney, and Magner to develop and introduce next year. If your looking long term, I don't think its a bad decision.

Nicholson and Evans either needed to be elevated from the rookie list or dropped as they have been on it for two years. We needed to elevate Nicholson because of the hole left by Rivers and we needed Evans for our midfield (look how thats turned out - one of our best players) Magner still has one more on the rookie list till we have to either promote him to the senior list or drop him. He was good last year but its fairly obvious why he wasnt promoted above Nicholson or Evans, gives him an extra year of training and good for our salary cap (rookies get paid a lower rate). If he keeps it up he will most likely be promoted and a big asset. Not a dumb management decision by the MFC - a smart, educated, and correct decision.

2007: 10 picks, 5 still active, 2 still with MFC Note: Morton #4 (West Coast - dont need to comment on performance), Martin #3 pre season draft (Brisbane - never should have drafted him), Maric #21 (played 21 games, gone) 2008 10 picks, 7 still active, 6 still with MFC Note: Watts #1 (Bennell was pick #35, played better footy and same amount of games), Blease was priorty picked at #17, Jurrah #1 pre season draft 2009 9 picks, 7 still active, 5 still with MFC Note: Scully priority picked at #1 (GWS - playing poorly there), Gysberts #11 (North - played 19 games since drafted), Tapscott #18 (been playing better this year), MaDonald #1 pre season draft (4th season and longest consecutive games played has been 5. Loyal and a leader - why isnt he playing this year?) 2010 12 picks, 7 still active, 7 still with MFC Note: Cook #12 (bad player, highest of our picks, never played a game at AFL, gone), Davis #50 (yet to debut, thyroid issue), Evans #31 rookie draft (one of our best players this year), Howe #33 (compare to Cook at #12 - one of our most promissing players + Evans) 2011 7 picks, 5 still active, 5 still with MFC Note: Magner #42 rookie draft (been great and played second most games of all players drafted in 2011), Taggart #36 (played 1 game, back issue in 2011, MFC's highest pick), Sellar #52 (played most games of all players drafted in 2011 - only 19), Sheahan #6 rookie draft (gone, not good enough) 2012 10 picks, 10 still active, 10 still with MFC Note: Hogan #2 mini draft (future investment), Viney f/s rule #26 (played well, 4 games), Jones #52 (played most games of all players drafted in 2012 - 5), Terlich #68 (been ok) There is alot more to who was drafted, but this is an interesting way to look at it. 2010 was our worst year, extremely lucky with Howe and Evans... extremely lucky

Problem: lazy players and no midfeild Solution: put Magner and Viney in

Isn't Dangerfield a big Melbourne supporter? He is from Victoria, but unfortunately signed with the Crows in 2012 for another 3 more years...

The MFC cant afford to stuff around anymore, its time to get serious and axe another coach, pay another coach even more money, and when that coach tries to rebuild everyone will complain about the short-term results so then we should get serious and axe another coach, pay another coach even more money, and when that coach tries to rebuild everyone will complain about the short-term results so then we should get serious and axe another coach, pay anothercoach even more money... oh wait - we have already done this twice over the past 4 years Who would bother with this club. The supporters are too short term orientated and the list is untalented/full of lazy players

She has already apologised http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-sport-blog/caroline-wilson-apologises-to-north-melbournes-director-of-medical-services/20130424-2iezr.html and she will again tomorrow - or probably just refer to this apology

Biggest worry is that we have been running after them all day. Brisbane have more than doubled our handballs and we are going to run ourselves dead by the end of the third.

The umpire paid that as a mark

Here is the link for Don's statement. You might be pleased to know that it's titled "From the President", written by the president and spoken by the president. It also was broadcasted on the 6'oclock news. http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-02-13/from-the-president It was in relation to Caroline Wilson's most inflamtory article during the inqusition period: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-shock--awful-20121102-28ppz.html RE The Age: I was away during the period when The Age stopped being our sponsor and asked someone to confirm it as I didnt want to make incorrect assumptions without having the correct facts behind me. The key difference between your view and mine is that you think the club looks weak because we are quiet. I believe you have to pick your battles. Don has stood up and given statements, such as the one above, when he has needed to, and like clubs such as Essendon, maintained a no-comment during issues such as the tanking investigation and now, and has gotten on with more important thing... like running a club, sorting out the Bates/Dank issue, making sure Trengrove gets through this and not getting his knickers in a twist and wanting to sue over a minor, non-defamitory statement by AD. Otherwise if you want talk for the sake of talk - go ask David Kosh to come and be president for us instead. Priorities. EDIT: spelling/grammar

Youre moulding two issues here (defamation from AD and defamation from CW) into the one issue. In regards to CW, Don gave a good, aggressive, statement in regards to an article or hers and dropped the Age as our sponsor (can someone also confirm this?) In regards to AD: His statements werent worthy of suing as they are non-defamatory (would get thrown out of court as they could argue a break down of communication between Gill and Andrew so to his knowledge we mislead them + argue that no actual damage [ie, loss of sponsor/business]) When the AFL is investigating your club, and one of its captains for drugs - regarless of how good our case is - its good business practice to remain consistant with our no comments to the media, and a few press releases (which we have done) We have no money to sue At the end of the day, the right people, like you, me, supporters, and the AFL (particulary Gill and now AD) know what we told the North has had a serious issue with Caro for a long time now. Her claims, that they have been taking drugs, are defamitory. AD's claims that we werent transperant with him in regards to our original statment arent. Its small, petty and not worth kicking up a stink over - pick your battles. Priorities: Jack/Bate/Drugs > a small non-defamatory comment by AD Ps, Just because I dont share your view, and I pick my fights doesnt mean I'm a push over. I'm a beligerant and the last person who lie down and lie on my knees EDIT: the ps and dot points

Thanks bossdog, unfortunately for me I see them as a dictatorship because of the bringing the game into disrepute rule. With Jack in the spot light with the AFL running around like idiots, I just think its best to keep our heads down, and let a petty issue with AD blow over. Gill knows our original statement, AD now knows our original statement, and thanks to the recent article everyone knows our original statement. Not worth suing! Its nothing like the Misfud/Davey/Neeld issue, or the Caro saying we tanked issue. Got to prioritise Jack and this drug issue over something not worth suing. And get rid of this bringing the game into disrepute rule...

All bark and no bite. If North sue Caroline Wilson for defamation ill eat my shirt. Otherwise I'm content with being quiet, the right people knowing what we said to Gill and ensuring we get a good outcome for Jack... not being loud, and threatening to sue over something pretty minor Priorities.

Sigh, RE tanking: We didnt loose our draft picks The club was found not guilty DB and CC charged under disrepute $500,000 fine - or roll the dice in court which will cost the same During this whole time we held a consistent view, led the media do their work, didnt add any fuel to the fire and came out with a pretty aggressive statement to CW. Yep, it worked out. --- Every club gets defamed. Look at North and Caro, look at Eddie and Caro, look at us and Caro. The difference is that this time its the AFL not Caro (dont bite the hand that feeds you) All im saying is that its in the best interests for the club to keep continuing with its quiet media front, until the Jack and Bate issue is resolved. They have said all they need to, and to the right people. The right people know the truth and to me thats all I care about. If you want to go chasing defamation cases by all me go for it. But its pretty petty, the club doesnt have any money, and why burn a bridge with the AFL/risk Jack's outcome. Priorities.

Agreed. Ps, the talk, such as the one Neeld gave, are usually given around 45min before the first bounce. Those angry, pump up, montage music talks are only found in Hollywood. Just saying.

Don't forget when Harry O'Brien got booked during the game when under the new sliding rules he should have been given a free kick: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/afl-admits-mistake-and-declares-collingwoods-harry-obrien-should-have-received-a-free-kick/story-e6frf9jf-1226621034758

I don't know what you've been reading but the club has mentioned everything in the article a while ago: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-04-18/response-to-730-report http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-04-19/club-statement-friday-19-april I respect the club's quiet approach when it comes to the media. It worked during the tanking inquisition. The verdict still isnt clear re Trengrove - dont you think its smart not to bashing the AFL over something petty such as miss-quoted statements and clearly a breakdown in communication between AD and GM compared to protecting and ensuring a good outcome for Jack and the club? Priorities.

Haha just had a flash back to when Viney played Green as a sub in 2011 - first ever player to selected as a substitute whilst being a captain... and off the top of my head the only

I was going to raise that up on a few posts but in all fairness they did descend into hell after that season as well. 1 year later they ended up 13th, WIlliams was gone a year after that during which they set the club record for longest consecutive losses (9), lost alot of players to either retirement (Tredrea [huge loss], Carr and Burgoyne) or players leaving (Krakouer to GCS), and they got rid of Primus who had given them their worst season in AFL history (2011 - 16th), featured back to back thumping of 138 and 165 points and 8 consecutive losses. The only thing Port did well was use the advantage of not being a Vic team (extra AFL funding), keep a solid membership base (around 38,000), and take advantage of the talent pool over there (something in the water). They have been rebuilding for a while, and have a bit to go. Will be good to see how they go against North or Carlton.

Also the supporters have a completely different mind set on Voss than we do with Neeld. Voss is their golden boy - its blasphemous to say or think anything bad about him

I dont think they will beat Carlton or Richmond. I hope they make it too. If they do it will be the first time they got into the top 8 since their grand final appearance in 2007

They are definitely on something - have you seen their president? Never heard such a crack fiend in my life... lucky he gets paid to smack talk

I thought of buying the number plate Ellie or 3llie... GT 390s are the perfect Elinor projects. I dont have a spare $250,000 for an original GT500 but the Chip Foose/Performance Elinor looks pretty awesome... and the engines still put out 350 BHP!

Well Steve - till you win check out this website for them: http://www.cars-on-line.com/mustang_2.html I want a '67 - possible Eleanor conversion and a bit cheaper than the Bullitt... which you can find with this link: http://www.cars-on-line.com/mustang_1.html They are USA stangs, but as long as they are under 59k (so you dont have to pay 30% for luxury car tax), just customs tax, importing costs and GST... plus about 12k if you want a good conversion to RHD (but you dont need to because its over 30 years old) and another 1.5k for a engine rebuild... one day mate - one day!.. or as you said one powerball!