sue

Possibly, but a bit of wishful thinking sure beats assuming every little thing that looks bad is an omen of forthcoming disaster.

The sentence in bold says it all - and do we really care about anything else? Compared to critical injuries etc this is a non event.

ditto

Uness you think there is some extra benefit to be got from a boot camp by springing it on players as a last minute surprise, (which is a big stretch) it fails staff communications 101 to do so. A boot camp is not the same as asking professionals to do something during their normal work time (or even look after their bodies at other times), It involves going away for a few days. That is something any other professional would like to know well in advance, especially at this time of year when people may have other plans outside of normal working hours.

So some of us are appalled that the players won't run through whichever brick wall the coach erects and some think this particular brick wall is stupid or counter-productive. But who can defend the players only being told few days in advance? (which I assume is true since no one has denied it). To me that raises more questions about the FD than about the players.

Excuse my ignorance, but wasn't the MRP composed of different members during the year. If so, that is the source of the inconsitency (well one source). Three permanent members seems best to me, preferably not ex-players but people who can judge bad behaviour without distortions coming from their own playing days and loyalties. Having ex-players on the MRP is like choosing supreme court judges from Pentridge.

Agree Ernest. Seems to me that the main supposed benefit of these boot camps is building team spirit and resilience. Based on last year's performance boot camps don't work for us. Why repeat it? Nevertheless it seems it was not well handled. But will be forgotten by Xmas. If other teams sledge us about it during games, then it's up to the players to respond appropriately. If you can be affected by sledging then you are mentally weak with or without boot camps.

Agree. You need to look no further than the fact that Captains almost never get dropped even if they are hitting a poor patch. And the reasons for that filter down to apply to other players as well.

Demons should not count their imps before they spawn. Look no further than the 2016 Premiers not making the 8 this year.

Analysing the differences between teams to determine why one team may be better than another is not making excuses for any team. It is simply discussing footy. Reasons are not necessarily excuses. Simply stating NO MORE EXCUSES DEES is only meaningful if you have analysed the team and its competitors and decide that the team more than matches all others in every way, personnel, team plan, etc. and is maybe lacking in some less tangible attribute like spirit. Otherwise it is merely an expression of (understandable) frustration with our past poor performance or arm chair player-motivation. So to those saying NO MORE EXCUSES DEES I express my joy that you have such a solid basis for expecting a great 2018 and hope you are right. Others may wish to discuss the reasons (not excuses) why we may not be certainties to win the flag and areas in which we need to improve. My apologies if the above appears pedantic, but hairy-chested tough guy statements like NO MORE EXCUSES DEES really annoy me. I guess I should be used to them on a footy forum.

Not hanging my hat on any of these stats - there are far too many variables and other factors. But saying "Only one statistic counts. Games won" doesn't add anything to a discussion, it's just tough talk. If we really believed that we would never discuss what causes a team to win or lose games. The forum would be pretty empty.

relax, the century didn't start until 2001.

Precisely what I meant. I suspect some in AFLHQ suffer withdrawal symptoms if they don't generate media frenzies regardless of whether they are good for the game.

Because it would generate more media interest which as we know is always beneficial to the game.

"I think I'm the type of person who doesn't mind having a laugh on the field." I'm glad to hear it. Though many here put the boot into a certain ex-player if he dared to smile, I think it is a good attitude - gives you additional leverage..

My my, I see that umpires used to run straight back without indicating to players that that is what they will do. Who thinks up this ludicrous ideas...

Now that is one that always irks me. They always run straight backwards, so why indicate that that's what they are going to do? Just more theatre for the umps to star in.

A good idea except we now have the 'stand 1m apart' rule which would have to go if the umpires don't know who it is that has to stand apart. What would be the effect of dropping the newish 1m rule?

I have mixed feelings about this. If the umpires enforced a recall for bounces which are clearly unfair to one of the ruckmen then I'd be for retaining it. At the moment they often let it go even if the ball would fall outside the outer circle. Maybe we need a third circle between the current two..... Of course they'd then get so many wrong we'd end up with 90% recalled non-bounce starts anyway, so just as well go the whole hog and drop the bounce.

One, next Sunday. I don't understand the antipathy to these games. The players seem keen to participate and it gives us something a bit different to watch during the annual footy drought. If people think it is silly, they don't have to watch it (and if they don't like the ridiculous hype the commentators make about it, there is the volume switch thank god). The injury rate seems pretty low, no worse than training. The Irish get the advantage of the familiar round ball, Oz has the advantage of having fully professional super-fit players and tackling, though I wouldn't mind if tackling was not allowed. So what if it is a 'game that doesn't really exist'. I can't get emotionally involved but am interested enough to watch it. Better than many other 'real' sports.

10. David Murray?

I'm surprised that in the 8 weeks or so we last saw him playing that that much muscle development is possible (assuming the player is not decked in red and black). How much time would a player have to spend in the team to achieve a big difference in 8 weeks? And why can't it happen during the season?

Better idea than just belittling people who make suggestions. Individuals and organizations banding together to achieve an objective is hardly the most unusual thing in society. But feel free to dismiss it as some hippie leftist fantasy if that makes you happy, but don't mock the person suggesting it.

Ah Demonland... Comment on any negative aspect of the draw and you will be sure to be told that the draw is irrelevant "good teams win anywhere anytime anyone", etc etc. So let's volunteer to play the top 4 teams from last year 5 times and play the games at Geelong. And then the posts which assume things supporters say on this forum actually have an effect on how the team will perform. So I'll whinge on behalf of another club. Why has Noprth got zero Friday night games and Carlton which finished below them on the ladder got 4. No prize for the answer.

I admit my recollection of all that is fuzzy, but is it not possible that the MFC doctors knew there was a problem but we were hardly likely to tell Richmond that and hoped they wouldn't find out. Not very ethical, but..... Or is this interpretation incompatible with the know sequence of events at the time?