H_T

Of course not, how ridiculous. we try for back to back!

This is it: - AFL BOSS BACKS DEES Looks like the Demons have got the green light. Go ahead Dees, and god speed.

Stick to the thread JtR and stop posting tripe. Back to thread. When we look back on this game, opposition supporters (incl. media) will refer to it is a game in which Melbourne tanked. The fact of the matter is the players did not tank, the coaches did not tank. As has been reported and stated by the Melbournefc FD many times as far back as before the season, they were aware of where the list was at internally, and that with such a young list alot of experimentation was going to take place. Players in defence moving forward, forwards back, etc. To improve adaptability and look at improving our scoring options. We've seen the likes of Geelong and Hawthorn switch players back and forward to change matchups and unsettle the opposition. This in fact happened on the weekend and as a direct consequence nearly resulted in a much deserved win. So if for some reason in the future if a Scully or whoever is carving it up for Melbournefc, and a mate or friend or opposition supporter at the footy (or in front of the tv) has a go at you that it was because of Melbourne "tanking" that we got Scully or whoever. You have the right to say back - that in fact we didn't tank that game - afterall we were in front when the siren went. Tell them, "Blame the AFL or the umpire - (because we didn't tank)", who wasn't quick enough on the whistle on hearing the siren and awarded Jordan McMahon the shot at goal. For those of you who think we cannot call Carlton tankers anymore because of this game, think again.

What are the odds that Mark Robinson will not be the one writing about this story!

You see nothing in him ....................what do you see then?

And that ladies and gentlemen is how..... Don't worry rpfc, I won't go there..

Great work DA! Awesome.

Oh. I'd be inclined for 2 and 4 in that regard, hypothetically. However, West Coast are out of the equation. So, I would be happy with 1 and 3, content with 1 and 4, over the moon with 1 and 2. :D PS. I must stop speed reading..

Welcome. Good post. Yes, it does make sense your last sentence. Great example regarding Shane Ellen. The past is littered of examples of throwing up match-ups to counteract the opposition.

How do you get picks 2 and 4??? It's more likely either 1 and 2, 1 and 3, 1 and 4 OR ... No.1 (by itself) No.2 (by itself) No.3 (by itself) No.4 (by itself)

I wouldn't underestimate Tom Scully. It may be a good top order (ie.1-6), but he is a standout.

I wasn't "privvy" to the SEN broadcast, but I've since heard bits and pieces of feedback....can you elaborate or give examples?

I'm not sure if he will get up this week. My thoughts are we don't need incentive.

Out: Whelan(inj) - no milestone games this week. In: Sylvia Hard to drop any players after a game in which they nearly won.

Not likely.

I blew up halfway through reading the second line to this post. All whilst laughing. Breathe! Bit of Grammar, couple of full stops and comma's wouldn't go astray, would it topflight?

Perhaps DB could use this tactic. I'm thinking taking two backs off when the opposition has the ball at their half back. <_<

19,876

They should be privileged to be among Victorians.

Reality check Roost It, I know where you are coming from but Richmond were pitiful to say the very least.

This could be an issue. Caroline Wilson is right onto it. Interviewing players and airing their thoughts is not what the club needs from my point of view.

I'd like the orchestra to be played a little earlier in the game to be honest.

Let's start thinking up a motto...(maybe it's too early for that)................. hey I know...what about "They know we're coming!".. Oh, wait that's been taken. Isn't he that dude that's in bed with that McGuire character? - I think that's his name, could be wrong. That's right Brockstars5. Whatever happens we will cop it. We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. I'd rather us cop it, knowing that what we've done was within the rules set by the AFL - that's been done before by other clubs - and that our club will be better off in the long run.

North are $1.38 for good reason. The bookies in this case don't have deep pockets. They'd be crazy to give better odds considering of all the talk happening. The one thing that is stopping them from closing their books for games involving the Dees and Freo is that - PLAYERS DON'T TANK.

I voted Trengove for my second pick. If we get it! I would be happy with Trengove. I'd also be quite content with either Butcher, Morabito or even Rohan at this stage if BP elected for either of these. Following scenario's (if cards fall into place - 4 wins or less & of course if Freo finish bottom 2 with Dees): - 1. Melb (Priority): Scully Freo (1st pick): Trengove (pure speculation) Melb (2nd pick): Morabito,Butcher or Rohan 2. Melb (Priority): Scully Melb (1st pick): Trengove