smoking dog

I have read so many posts blaming the premature dumping of experienced players for our current situation, it's hard to believe that there are people on this site that would like to see one of our only reliable older players shown the door. Rivers may well want to move to a more successful club (who could blame him?) but I believe he'll stay on

I'm sure Frank Davis was #7 ??? HBF in the '64 Grand Final team ...

When Barassi left I was 12. I'd just seen the Demons win the '64 Premiership and I simply couldn't believe it (I still can't!) To me, RDB was Melbourne - my worldview lost its innocence overnight. In more recent times the losses that have caused me the most pain were (in order):

1. Scott Thompson

2. Jeff Farmer

3. Stephen Powell

4. Darren Jolley

5. Strawbs O'Dwyer

6. Gerard Healy

7. Woey

8. Earl Spalding

9. Danny Hughes

10. Brian Wilson

Dear fellow Demons,

With our many years of suffering I am sure that our supporters more than any others will feel compassion after hearing this story.

Please check in at -

www.theteamthatneverplayed.com

If it gets enough hits this film will get made,

Best Wishes to all,

Smoking Dog (last smiled at the 1964 grand final)

I know there are many who'll disagree, but I can't understand why Bate keeps getting left out of this discussion. It seems to me that this guy is just starting to show us something after a few developmental years and should be a viable forward option, along with Garland, Martin etc. I think Morton will end up forward as well. How about a forward line made up of

Morton Watts/Garland Davey

Jurrah Bate / Jamar (?) Wona

(with Martin, Dunn, Jetta, Maric, etc. in reserve)

How about that group being fed by Scully, Trengove (fingers crossed), Moloney, Grimes, Blease et al?

Looks pretty potent to me!

Yeah, youre missing something. Richmond have 5 wins and a draw. We have 4 wins.

Doesnt matter what happens next week, we get the spoon.

If we win, we still get the spoon, but miss out on the PP.

We wont win.

Thanks, Einstein! I'm feeling very non-Einstein having missed that, but you've greatly relieved me (I'm following all this from Hong Kong atm) - if I could, I'd share the champagne with you - I'll drink to your health (and Tom Scully's) instead!

Now the Dockers have beaten Essendon, we HAVE to come 16th, which means we take Tommy even if we beat the out of form Saints next week!I guess we're playing for Trengrove, now! Pick 1, 2 and 19 is far better than 1 and 19!!

Let's hope the Saints don 't rest their stars(despite the shorter break than us), and really go for it next week.

The trouble is, using that reliable tipping guide of recent results.....we killed Freo by 10 goals. Freo killed Essendon by 6 goals. Essendon beat St Kilda. We should beat the Saints by 16 goals!

Am I missing something here? Please tell me if I am. With St Kilda looking decidedly wobbly, the Dees showing that they can occasionally put it all together, and Richmond playing West Coast at Subiaco next week (they're only a tiny fraction ahead of us on percentage), isn't it possible that we might miss out on the spoon ?

What if we beat the Saints? Richmond will get flogged by West Coast and lose percentage, so we could easily end up 15th., meaning that:

1. we lose the PP &

2. Richmond claim Scully (a Tiger supporter).

As I said, am I missing something? For now I'm leaving the cork in my champagne.

Jamar / Bartram / Bell + Pick 35 (or thereabouts) for a higher draft pick? Adelaide teams might go for Jamar . . . . . and Bell for that matter.

I like the idea of embracing our heritage and history, but I also like the way that a player is able to carve their own history, with whichever number that they want to play in.

Surely it's up to the individual, the availability of certain numbers, and the prevailing attitude from coaching staff?

I can remember players being coy about claiming Robert Flower's #2 until Steven Tingay came along and leapt at the chance to wear it.

If you have a past champion (e.g. #5 at Geelong) what do you do - leave the number vacant because it has a formidable history? While I'd love to see a player strike out and claim the #99 (as I've said in an earlier post) it's a conservative culture with valuable traditions (tradition is just about all we've got apart from a promising young list).

To take up your point though, there's a challenge around certain numbers such as #26 and #37 which are yet to become legendary, while others, such as #3 and #27 have a rich recent history.

The #13 was a strange one until Allen Jakovich, and then Adem Yze made it a blue-chip number. I'd love to see somebody adding to this (growing) tradition. Why not Blease or, even better, Jurrah?

From memory, our list of high number legends/cult favourites is pretty short - #41 Peter Rohde, #42 Peter Walsh, #43 Guy Rigoni, #45 Mathew Whelan (can't think of any others).

Yeh from all reports Struass is a top fella. A good private school boy and very likeable, i thought he trained very well yesterday. His kicking is the feature of his game something DB will be keen to promote as much as possible.

Rohan Bail was pretty inconspicuous at training didnt notice him until towards the end of the session when he kicked a nice goal from 40 out on the run, is a good size and has the body to play senior footy now. A real show for the NAB cup.

and thanks, Flashdance

strauss looked likely. did some excellent chase downs and has pace. he also looks like the sort of little [censored] that supporters will love - and hate. exactly what we need IMHO.

couldnt pick out bail, mainly because i have no idea what he looks like. but strauss caught my eye. he was vocal too, and i spent 30 mins trying to work out who he was, although the nickname straussy is a bit of a giveaway

Thanks, Benno

i dont like aussie changing numbers because heaps of people have already bought the 39 for their jumpers and now they will have to change. i like the idea of people being able to make something out of their own number.

So Neitz should've stayed on #38, Stynes should've stayed on #37, Junior should've stayed on #52 (?) etc. etc. etc.

Any opinions on Bail and Strauss? Someone has suggested that they're the two most likely to debut in the near future.

Good thing Wayne Carey's retired!

Giving the new players high numbers (with the exception of Watts) seems like a brilliant idea to me - it says that being on the list doesn't mean that you're automatically in the top echelon. Also, if the low numbers continually go to glamour recruits, it removes the possibility of "under the radar" players being symbolically rewarded for their progress. A number promotion for Aussie is totally justified, while there are clearly other players (Davey, Whelan, Bruce) who should be first in line for those low numbers when they become available. I reckon this is another example of DB putting pride and motivation back into the club.

Obviously, some players prefer to have a high number - Platten, Koutofides etc. Also remember Wasim Akram wearing #66 in one day cricket. Would be great to see a true non-conformist player who requests the number 99! :o