Jump to content

mauriesy

Life Member
  • Posts

    3,437
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by mauriesy

  1. Just make it that you must take any father-son with your second round pick.
  2. Signed on at the Suns for two more years. Next!
  3. Maybe we've dodged a bullet with Scully, the $6 million man for whom you currently wouldn't give $600,000. The compo picks may be far more useful. Please tell me how on earth you can decide whether a so-far undetermined pick is 'overs' for Viney.
  4. Because it suits the Demonland critics of Melbourne's recruiting to think that we might not get one right, for a change. It suits the naysayers to think we'll be paying too much for him, even if we don't. We are in a win-win situation with the first round compo pick. The further up the ladder we finish, the less we pay for Viney. The further down the ladder, the more our compo pick is worth (even if we have to pay for Viney with #2 or #3). Of course, the absolute win-win-win situation would be to finish bottom and get Stringer, Whitfield and Viney (at #23), but I doubt that will happen.
  5. Garry Lyon on Footy Classified showed McKenzie and Sellar doing the same thing. It's a definite team issue, but Moloney as an experienced senior player should be 'getting it' even more than the others.
  6. I for one am not making excuses for anyone.
  7. Doesn't matter a fig if their 10 are elite and our 10 are B or C graders.
  8. Exactly. Moloney is not defensive enough and is not accountable enough for his opponent. Stats for 2012 (club) 1st in centre clearances 15th for total disposals 16th for tackles 17th for uncontested possessions (indicates he doesn't run to space) It's a big decrease since his B&F year.
  9. Every time? He's only played once.
  10. I agree, and I share the same hope. Perhaps slightly more than a smidgen, hopefully more when he gets older.
  11. Suggesting a trade for a player is just standard fare for Melbourne supporters when they want to criticise a player. Just because they've suggested Sylvia and Moloney, among others, in the past doesn't make a Watts trade any more sensible. What makes you think Adelaide would be interested in a soft Watts in a trade exchange for a hard nut like Dangerfield? Teams are full of "good, ordinary but still valuable footballers", a rung below the elite. If you traded every one on a whim, you'd be turning your list over ever three years.
  12. If you get a Casey ticket as part of your membership, half the team is Melbourne players, and we train there during summer, it seems to me to be perfectly legitimate to 'barrack' for Casey and think of them as 'our' team.
  13. If you get over the idea that Watts will be an elite key forward, and start to think that he may just be a good, ordinary but still reasonably valuable footballer, then I think it puts any trade thoughts into a better perspective. It seems to me that those entertaining a somewhat 'rash' trade are basing their notions on him being a 'failed #1' and reacting to that, rather than his present value. OK, so we didn't get a star with our #1 pick. That doesn't necessarily mean we just throw him out for a bargain price.
  14. Any footballer, or indeed any citizen, could make the investment Judd did. It is not related to salary cap issues etc. because it used Judd's own or borrowed money.
  15. The matter before the County Court was an issue involving the Victorian public gaming register, controlled by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation. If it was a taxation avoidance issue it would be before the Federal Court and it would involve the Taxation Department or ASIC.
  16. Only to the extent that the gaming register requires investors to notify it of investments made in gaming companies ... presumably to determine possible conflicts of interest (by any citizen). If it was an normal investment in company shares, property etc. he has no legal requirement to be open about it. He is not a member of parliament or a public officer, for example.
  17. He could start by playing in the backline for Casey.
  18. Anyone in this world can invest in any opportunity they come across or are offered as a result of their employment. It doesn't necessarily make it 'sleazy', 'underhand' or even illegal. Often it's called 'networking'. Do you think a Toyota worker shouldn't get a discount on a car, a Metro employee a discount on public transport, or a company director low-priced share options?
  19. I'm not in disagreement that losing has to hurt to some extent, but there's a life balance that Stynes taught us a lot about. Once the game is over, it's over. Rather than sitting around for days moping and getting personally angry, Stynes just resolved to come out next week fitter, harder and stronger, and to train better during the week. While a golfer certainly can't tackle an opponent (!), they can still either do something about anger and lack of skill, by practicing and seeking advice, or they just keep doing the same thing over and over again, angrily, and hoping for a different outcome. That's a definition of stupidity. It's all about positive reaction to losing rather than negative reaction.
  20. Garry Lyon said that Jim Stynes was as competitive a player as you would ever see, but he never got upset about losing a match, at least for more than an hour or so. While he would be disappointed, Stynes never let losing harbour lingering feelings of anger, remorse or depression. He just got on with being as competitive as possible again the next week. It's like a golfer getting angry at missing a putt or making a bad shot. The best position to take is to just concentrate on the next shot, not throw a club and let feelings of anger interrupt your preparation, application or skill execution.
  21. Hardness can be learned (although the preservation instinct is strong in a lot of us). While it's a mental state, a bigger body, more experience and even getting injured a few times can overcome the fear associated with going in hard.
  22. You can certainly argue about the ethical nature of gambling investments. However, the AFL in general is full of betting and gambling, and Melbourne is sponsored by Deesbet. There's nothing illegal about investing in a gambling company. Thousands of Mum and Dad investors have shares in Tabcorp, for instance. Most would say it's a far better investment than gambling itself. The only issue surrounding Judd is to do with public disclosure of the investment. The Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation keeps a public register of people who have investments in gaming, and there was a 'third-party' deal to keep Judd's name off the register, no doubt for PR purposes. The judgement handed down in the County Court on March 1 found no approval or consent for Judd's investment was ever sought from the commission. If anyone wants to tie it in with Visy, salary caps and brown paper bags, they're barking up the wrong tree.
  23. Playing in the VFL certainly didn't send him backwards in the courage stakes.
  24. Why not? Magner played VFL for five years and learnt it there. He doesn't lack it at AFL level. This is all about setting standards. Players have to 'go' at AFL level. They need to demonstrate intensity, not get away with a second-class effort and let down their teammates. Sending a player back to the VFL for lack of intensity is exactly the right option, regardless of whether it's a #1 draft pick, a 10-year player or a new rookie.
×
×
  • Create New...