sue
-
Posts
6,457 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Everything posted by sue
-
Living in the depths of NSW there are only 2 games sure to be broadcast on TV each week. Sydney & GWS games. Having watched all the GWS games (between their performance and the endless excuses and barracking they get from commentators, it would be almost as painful as watching us - if I cared), I'm sure $cully was only made #3 to justify Sheedy's lunacy in paying him so much.
-
It was amusing when PJ was arguing we deserved a PP and listing how bad we have been, not beating a top 8 club etc and he mentioned the exception of beating Sydney, Roos chimed in with a grumpy 'by 75 points'. Still rankles. Happy he has forgiven us.
-
Did I hear him imply there was a new sponsor?
-
Good to you you guys are prompt with the Demonland banner
-
But given Roos' past comments he is more likely to say the opposite and say "Sorry Jack, you've had a rough time but I can make you a better player". What will you say then? Sack Roos? As I've said before, if we get Roos and he wants Watts, then that is good enough for me. Certainly better than what any posters here say. Ditto if he doesn't want him.
-
Agree, but perhaps 'will' should be 'should' in the above. I can imagine politics stopping us from getting one and in future years a team which has performed less badly than us gets one.
-
My position on Watts is now very simple - if we get Roos and Roos says Watts is required. He is. I don't care how weak or uncommitted is is.
-
umm, might depend on your school results and the subject you wanted to do so, yes, you might want/have to go to UWA/Curtin etc.
-
This article about NC has an interesting para about Roos: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/lions-set-to-interview-neil-craig-20130903-2t3fd.html Craig shapes as a major domino in Melbourne's audacious play for Paul Roos, who is seeking to put together a ''ticket'' - a coaching group that he feels he can work successfully with - for the Demons before accepting the job .
-
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/lions-set-to-interview-neil-craig-20130903-2t3fd.html
-
Fair enough BB. My intent was to critique the OP's bald statement, which if accepted would say lack of commitment is sufficient to trade someone as good as Buddy. I think you'd agree that it is not sufficient, though one would prefer star player with commitment. I agree with what you say about about relative leverage of course.
-
True, but you miss my point. The OP said : He has said he doesn't know if he wants to play for the club. That's enough for me to want to get a decent trade going and forget about player attachment. I said there may be lots of reasons to trade someone (as you believe applies in Watts' case), but the above is not sufficient to want to trade someone, eg. Buddy.
-
I think the reverse. There may be all sorts of reasons for wanting to trade Watts, but I don't think this is one of them. Few players have any loyalty to a club these days. Would Hawthorn supporters say trade Buddy for no other reason than he hasn't fully committed to the club? (No, I'm not saying Watts is as valuable as Buddy, just saying there are more important reasons to trade/retain than commitment these days. Also not saying the way Watts spoke reflected well on him.)
-
GWS $1m for $cully makes Roos salary, whatever it is, seem a bargain.
-
Bombers scandal: charged, <redacted> and <infracted>
sue replied to Jonesbag's topic in Melbourne Demons
Good to see someone comment on Hird being extended by Essendonk just as he was suspended. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-31/hird-would-not-have-a-job-at-port-adelaide-koch/4926756 -
Maybe I misunderstood what you mean, but any coach would be looking at all factors, including the drug issue. It's an overly optimistic to suggest that the 'fact' that Roos may coach implies we are clear on the drug issue, but it at least means he feels we are clear enough to risk it. Or maybe it's one of the things leading to him not being 100% yet until he learns more. Would anyone but the desperate touch Essendon with a 10 foot pole?
-
http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/paul-roos-says-hes-a-50-50-chance-to-coach-melbourne-next-season/story-e6frf39c-1226707837844#.UiBtBWTG1U4
-
What is the evidence for the interview not going well? Seems to be treated as gospel here.
-
The first self-contradictory sentence typifies many Demonland posts. There is apparently no room for doubt in statements like "It won't be x", but the author really means "In my view it's extremely likely it will not be x". Which is fine. But by not stating the qualifications it then leads to a flame war which can spread over 10 pages. What fun.
-
ah, another alternative tea leaf reading. Brush off the down may imply he coached a swan......
-
Bombers scandal: charged, <redacted> and <infracted>
sue replied to Jonesbag's topic in Melbourne Demons
OK thanks, news to me. Of course many hard working doctors with a thriving business do retire, especially if something is forcing their hand. So the speculations I raised may perhaps still be relevant. -
Bombers scandal: charged, <redacted> and <infracted>
sue replied to Jonesbag's topic in Melbourne Demons
Why do you ask that? I did say it would loom large in his mind which would be for all the reasons you list. I can also understand that he may enjoy being a doctor until he drops. But he is surely at an age when he could retire, ie doesn't need a job to survive. I'm raising the question, can he just quietly drop out of being a quack? If he can do that and thus simply avoid the possibility of the shame/mortification of being struck off, fighting might indicate he thinks he has a good case. Or it might indicate he is even more of a stubborn fool than Hird. If he cannot quietly drop out and is sure to be struck off if he loses, then he might fight tooth and nail even with a weak case. (Personally I'd like a younger doctor who is more likely to be up-to-date, but old enough to have had enough experience. And if she writes a letter, ensures she follows up on it.) -
I did say 'a bit weak'. I don't disagree with any of the above. Just making the point about timescales which does relate to intent. A lot of the focus before was about the effect on gambling (at least that probably drove the MFC-AFL settlement) and from that point of view dropping your 10 best players is unsettling. But as I have long argued, punters should add 'strategic desire to win' to their betting considerations and not whinge.
-
Bombers scandal: charged, <redacted> and <infracted>
sue replied to Jonesbag's topic in Melbourne Demons
He's no spring chicken. Does he do any medical work outside of the club? I'd guess very little (yes, I'm guessing), so I don't think he'd be worried about being struck of except for the shame of it. That of course could loom large in his mind. I don't know if a quack can retire and de-register himself to dodge being struck off. -
While 55 has a point, albeit a bit weak, the real difference is timescale. His real tankers (MFC, Carlton etc style) are trying to win, but on a longer timescale than Freo-style non-tanking. Freo field a team which they know is likely to lose so their good players can be fit for the immediate finals and win. We and Carlton etc field/position a team badly knowlng it is likely to lose hoping to get high draft picks so as to win in the future. (Note the italics around likely. I don't think anyone has tanked by asking a player to miss a goal.)
