Tony Tea

Carlton's tanking was less about Kreuzer, and more about Judd.

Junior has most definitely lost his edge on the ball, and I was all set to join the call for him to pull the pin. But the last few weeks he has shown he has plenty to offer as a backline stopper. He makes excellent position, is a fine tackler, knows when and where to fill space, and is very capable body-on-body. If I was an opposition small forward, I would dread Junior walking over to pick me up at the start of a game. He's probably got two years in the role if he stays fit.

Au contraire, Mr Morton. That would be "funny" rumour. The difference is small, but significant, as I'm sure you appreciate.

I heard Tigers.

Want to read a "funny" rumour?

HT, I agree with you. However, there has been a general escalation in legal activity by public persons who have taken issue with, for instance, restaurant critics, music critics, and now bloggers. The alleged threats from the AFL to SEN to deny them the footy rights unless they sacked Grant Thomas fall in similar territory. The corollary is: be careful, and think before you press "post".

I don't know about that, E25. Read this: Public personalities, celebrities, call them what you will, are gunning for the internet.

That has a ring of reality to it. Or Jones and pick 33. (Or is that pick 34? The PP seems to throw the numbers out.) Melbourne WILL shop Jones around. When you balance trade-value vs. in/dispensability, Jones is our player with the highest currency. Also, Melbourne would be mad not to shop Rivers around. If we traded him for a reasonable pick or a good young player we would be ahead in the deal.

Flanagan's article: Wrong! Melbourne did not play West Coast in Perth, round four 1998. That match was round 14. What an appalling, horrendous and unforgivable mistake! Martin Flanagan is a complete and utter imbecile. Signed: Antony Godemons, age 47 and a half.

I'm also worried about beating Carlton. To make sure we don't I propose the following match-ups: 1) PJ on Judd; 2) Newton on Gibbs; 3) Robbo on Fevola; 4) Bate on Betts; 5) Jetta on O'Hailpin 6) Junior into the ruck 7) Bartram on Murphy (the double-bluff, so our motives don't look to obvious)

When Andy Maher tries to sound dramatic - often by way of a beat-up - he instead sounds like a panicky old woman. He is a prize pearl-clutcher.

Freo will beat Port? Sure, Port are flaky, but Freo invented flaky. Freo Port is too hard to call, but Port will start favourite, despite playing away from AAMI.

Ray Shaw? Tony.

Most definitely a danger game, in the reverse sense. There is every chance we will imitate West Coast and win the game after a massive tank game. It's hard to imagine we can do any more than we did yesterday, especially with the increased focus. What's more, North are awful. A win this week would be disastrous. We would probably end up 14th - out of both the priority pick AND the top pick.

BT, commentating the Eagles game, reckons that because we won with a kick after the siren, we are off the hook. That made me laugh, but I think he was laughing, too.

Further to that. The AFL clarified the rule a few years ago, and again after Siren-gate in Launceston. The is a misconception that the quarter ends when the umpire signals with his arm up. Not so. The quarter ends as soon as any one of the three umpires hears the siren.

You need a Yes AND No option.

If KB sticks to his guns and maintains tanking doesn't happen, he's only doing it out of habit. After listening to SEN today it's hard to believe KB's heart is still in the No-One Tanks camp. Not once during the game did he take up the cudgels against Harford, Maher and Wakelin, who all stated quite plainly that the tank was on. Then, by the end of the day, he was joking along with both his co-commentators and the post-game talk-back callers. Tanks... sorry, thanks to Richmond's ineptitude, today was just too obvious. Melbourne had to work extraordinarily hard to manufacture the loss, and the tank was obvious to even the most ardent denialists. The papers, the radio, On the Couch, Footy Classified, and the rest will be full of tank talk. KB's comments tomorrow should be interesting, as will any from Andy D.

Also, Frawley & Warnock in the forward line; and PJ at full-back

Richmond are so bloody dreadful they almost lost despite us trying just about everything to lose short of playing Davey in the ruck. The Tiges should have won comfortably. Melbourne nearly won by accident. In fact, I now hate Richmond even more than I did before. Instead of winning by several goals and consigning the game into the mists of history, they were so pathetic they won in "dramatic fashion" to put even more heat into the tanking issue. We will now cop a heap of ugly attention because today's result will be viewed as every bit as notorious as Round 22, 2007 and West Coast last weekend - maybe even more notorious. Will the AFL get involved? They only had to listen to the radio talk-back after the game to realise the current situation stinks. Bloody Richmond.

Yes, think Michael Jordan.

Logically. In the first 16 weeks we had a tough draw. Around 12 difficult match-ups with the most winnable games against North, Richmond, and WC and Port at the MCG. In the last 6 weeks we have a much easier draw: Sydney, Richmond, North, Freo, Carlton and St Kilda. Only one of the last six is a certain loss, while each of the other five is "winnable". We would have won today if we kicked straight, and we have roughly 346 players on the injury list - that is how bad Sydney is. First sixteen: 75% tough. Last six: 17% tough.

Hopeless Frawley is quick out of the blocks: "Melbourne will use Stef White in the ruck."

I've said it before, but when Jim Stynes first appeared as president on Footy Classified, he said "we weren't allowed to tank." Weren't allowed by who? Mark Webber? The principle of Auburn South Primary? Fantastic Furniture? It's hard to imagine it means anything other than the AFL had been in Jim's ear "suggesting" it might go bad for the Demons if they tanked. Since we are so heavily dependent on the AFL for assistance, would it not be conceivable that they have attached strings to the relative distribution fund? And then there's the draw. "Tank and you get a rubbish draw." That one, of course, must be future-dated by several years since our draws are already rubbish.

Even Delicious Bruce was stunned. Dennis just thought it was so bad it was funny.