sue

Binman, while some of what you say in your post above about the how the world has changed with regard to instant information is true, you overlook some things. First the average paid-up supporter does not follow all that stuff as obsessively as people on this forum do. The thing that will get them to drop their membership is us losing, not some vague feeling they are being fed spin about injury return dates. I see no evidence that we spin more than other clubs (but sadly do lose more). We just feel it more because it is our club - a bit like bad umpiring decisions. I'm of the view that all those modern 21st century marketing gurus that the clubs employ have decided spin is good in attracting those more numerous and less obsessive supporters who don't read this forum every 10 minutes like us. We just need to grin and bear it.

The spin may do the opposite to the atypical MFC members who post here, but perhaps marketing gurus at all the clubs, not just us, are of the opinion that for the bulk of less obsessive supporters, the spin works. In which case we should grin and bear it.

Pretty sure they have tests, pretty sure different people pass or fail depending on what happened to them and their individual response. re Fitz playing, I've no idea whether they have a test such that if you fail it on Thursday, it means there is no way you will pass a test on Sunday. If they do, since he has been named in the squad, he's either got past that hurdle or MFC are trying to keep WCE guessing.

do a google search for the link. In the search results click on the article. usually works. Don't tell Rupert. ed: might be unclear, I mean enter the URL of the link in google search.

I wouldn't put a high probability on it. But there were 2 players mentioned in the doomsayers litany. Currently looks like out of the 50/50 we may get 50%. So I'll play the same game: Do you seriously think there is no chance that Fitz will play? Clearly we are going through a very rough injury patch at just the worst time for our club in our position. Maybe even worse in some ways than a team going into its first grand final which loses all its tall players the week before. But we have enough doom and gloom without some posters looking to squeeze out every possible negative. Surely this is the time to squeeze out positives if anything.

Because they haven't been cut already as most of the doomsayers around here have assumed.

Since you picked that up from the team announcement, you could have added a positive, namely it would seem McDonald and Fitz may be OK.

I can't find the post, but someone in one of these injury update threads made the point that it was no use to hide that someone might not play on Sunday because the teams have to be announced 4 day before so there was plenty of time for an opposition team to make their plans then. I din't see anyone pointing out the obvious flaw in that argument, so here goes: He neglected the fact that the both teams have to announce their team at the same time. The opposition will be in a better position to make their team selections if they know about the other team's injuries. So secrecy about the injury status of players is useful to every club. I'm not saying this in itself justifies the spin we hear.

Thanks for helping to prove my point about the relentless negativity of some of us.

Refreshing to see someone looking at the facts rather than accepting the usual 'we do everything wrong' cry.

Saty - several posters have frequently complained that the inury updates Misson delivers are works of fiction. Given you apparently have good contacts within the club, how about asking Misson to address that in one of his updates. Doubtless some will just dismiss it as more spin but he may say something which will make them feel that there is nothing special going on at MFC compared to other clubs.

I'd be more suspicious if they issued a quick report given the number of players in 2 codes they are investigating. It's not as if the cases within Essendon are independent of each other, so they all have to be done at once. I'd believe ASADA needs more staff before I'd believe they are corrupt or incompetent.

Precisely. Was rhetorical as you no doubt guessed. Has he ever proffered a justification, however weak?

What sort of low life would have all the evidence to prove that nothing untoward was done at EFC and not make it public as early as possible to exonerate the players and the club and the AFL. But no, Dank says he will wait till he is in court (assuming he ever is). As for ASADA, on the contrary, I wouldn't trust them if they conducted enquiries into multiple players in 2 codes etc quickly.

I thought it might be worth a thread which focuses on Roo's general approach and gameplan. Mods, please axe if it already exists or is more appropriate elsewhere or just plain stupid. I think this article from Roos explains why he didn't move Watts forward on Saturday. Looks like he'd rather get everyone playing their planned role than toss the team about to secure a win. Painful for us supporters and lets hope he knows how to lessen the pain for the players. Take down the scoreboards: Paul Roos

That's not my picture either. Glad you are happy

name or a verb.

You just keep on thinking up irrelevant examples. Presumably he is entitled to his pay under his a contract. Full stop. If you don't like such contracts agitate within the AFL to change them. But perhaps it would be better to reflect on how it is that people like some company directors, CEOs and their tame politicians can earn more than 50 times the average wage when such large discrepancies were unknown only 25 years ago.

No. And it is good to hear you being a bit positive.

While we and presumably Roos know have important a win might be, it is possible that Roos plans to concentrate on everyone knowing their basic role first so he won't throw players around just to increase the chances of a win. Once he is confident they have learnt their basic role, that may change. I hope this doesn't offend some posters, but for the moment at least I'd back his decisions over the opinions of us spectators.

Sometimes it seems like the less hope the player with the ball has of getting rid of it, regardless of prior opportunity, the more likely he is to be pinged. Especially if his acting skills of pretending to punch it away aren't Academy Award standard. What I hate is the third and fourth bloke jumping on the pack and tackling the tackler to try and protect his teammate on the bottom from being pinged. If they paid a few frees for tackling the tackler who does not have the ball we'd have less piles of players and it would be clearer to the umpire if the guy with the ball has any hope of getting rid of the ball.

I saw a couple on Sat night which should have been redone. But I don't think there is anything systematic.

Yet again? If only we had been in enough winnable positions in recent times to be able to say that. Crikey, I'm starting to sound like OldDee.

I reckon if our half our players were hit by a meteorite during the warm-up and someone here dared to give that as a reason we lost the game, they'd be howled down for just making excuses.

And they were right to say that after we played Port. It took at least one more match for it to become clear where were were at, but extrapolating from the first two was sadly easy with the 2011 performance to 'build' on. With a new coach and some new midfield players I'm not coming to any conclusions even if we get trounced by WCE. Sadly, you will I'm sure.