Nasher

So what ought we be now other than what we are? rpfc was repeatedly posting circa 2010 that, in spite of it being post-bottoming out, our list had gotten younger since the 2007-2009 "events". I don't know if anyone's bothered crunching the numbers recently, but I'd be stunned if we weren't still in the bottom four clubs in terms of experience on the playing list and potentially still going backwards.

There are at least 3 other threads on the main page this would've fitted in to. Please use one of those next time. My suggestion would be the post match thread: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/29818-post-match-discussion-v-west-coast/

People want him to rant and rave and be out of control. Apparently there's something wrong with being calm and measured - it means you've got no HEART or SPIRIT (because they mean more if you write them in BIG LETTERS) or some other such hyperbolic nonsense.

Yet another inane thread.

Thanks for sharing,

Thanks for injecting a bit of humour, but do we need yet another thread? http://demonland.com...n-v-west-coast/

You could be a not-expert in the post-match thread if you like: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/29818-post-match-discussion-v-west-coast/

I know, that's why it's a joke that so far in this thread Clark has been the most whinged about.

Spot on right to the last point so far old - 48 down at half time.

That'll happen Doc, but come on, as if it was ever going to be this week. With the events of this week and the absolute gulf in class between the sides, there was never going to be any result other than this one.

I too am shattered Clark isn't single handedly pulling us out of the poo. We should give that money to the midfielders and defenders who are also getting completely spanked.

Gee, I'm surprised West Coast are beating us soundly.

It doesn't matter how "steeled" they are. Even if they absolutely play out of their skins, I can't see them winning. We are severely outclassed, playing on their dung heap. I wish it were as simple as "if they just tried harder they'd win". Yeah, nah. It's been quite a while since I've gone in to a match with this much with this much trepidation dread. This is going to hurt, severely.

I had the same thought about that line in particular. Er...? It's a board level decision, Patty. How can the board make a decision without meeting? Weird.

No they can't - Demonland is not particularly interested in being sued by the Herald Sun for publishing their private content. If you want to read the HS articles, you'll have to subscribe.

I'm here for you Clint. 30 posts zapped - clearly some of you boys had nothing better to do today

That's Rivvo from Demonology isn't it?

RGRS - your post was deleted because it was inappropriate. Asking questions or initiating discussion is fine - sledging the CEO through Demonland is not. I'm closing the thread now - Cam can start a new one if he'd like to "reach out" again.

These types of things are super-frustrating and disappointing. As Chook said, it's not that hard, just don't pick up the bottle. It's especially easy when you know the consequences. I think another 9000 facepalms will just about cover it.

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm saying it's not reasonable. So say we do start a policy of "read the CEO's facebook page of major sponsors" - where do we stop? Do we read its board members facebook page? Do we read the facebook page of every new employee for the club? I think it's absolutely the club's responsibility to ensure the company checks out - in the club's view it did (though this may have proven to be debatable in the long run as RobbieF et al touched on). I remain to be convinced that it's the club responsibility to check out individuals from the company before proceeding.

According to Schwab in the press conference yesterday, sponsorships being behind in payments was not out of the norm in the industry, and that EW had recently made a payment that had brought them up to date. Basically, he said this was a non-issue but as usual the media have run with it anyway. Draw your own conclusion, of course, but I think it's quite a jump to get from "he made racist remarks" to "the finances were never up to scratch anyway". In time you may have proven correct, but we'll never know now. According to Schwab in the press conference yesterday (yeah, that one again), they still believe they did all the diligence. I don't think it's reasonable to be checking someone's private facebook page, and I highly doubt anyone else does this. You also (depending on how the user sets it up), need to "friend" a person before you can read their stuff. What would I do if I had a friend request from a potential employer (or corporate partner, etc)? *reject*. We don't what "due diligence" was done - but for mine there's nothing that could be done in order to uncover this sort of thing. Even if you did research in to the personal activities of the CEO, where do you stop? What about its board members, middle level management etc?

The point is, they're all mediums, including Frawley (and Talia), so the type of player they play on should be reasonably interchangeable, and I believe that is the case. Sellar is the only true tall defender we have - hence the need to recruit him in the first place. And given than Col Garland and James Frawley aren't currently standing in my living room, I don't see what option I have other than to use stats to make my point.

Not to mention the fact that all the keyboard recruiters were upset because we passed on Talia when they thought he was going to be a gun forward. The fact that he's making his debut as a defender only vindicates our decision to give him a miss.

Who else is there to add DA? I can understand of not selecting Couch this week given where we're playing, and other than that the cupboard is completely bare. Even overlooking the fact that it's at Subi, adding another zero gamer doesn't endow me with much extra confidence, Magner's form in the first round notwithstanding.

Garland is 2cm shorter than Frawley and Rivers is 1cm shorter than Frawley. Go have a look at ruler and see what sort of difference that is. The three are, for all intents and purposes, the same size. And just to add, Tom McDonald is 194 and Troy Davis is 192 - with the improved form these two have shown, odds are that at least one of them will be good enough. And how many monster key defenders do you need anyway? Smart play while defending and aggression while attacking are more important than pure size. Garland and Frawley tick both these boxes. With a defence centred around these two, this is the only area on the ground where I feel we've truly got an advantage over other teams.