sue

Clearly a fitness man who had great success at other clubs has no idea what weight our players should have.

OK, our admin hasn't triumphed in all areas, but why do we have so many on here who think the worst of the admin at every turn without at least waiting to see what happens? When these were posted it was still possible that Jones was planned to be parachuted into Skilled Stadium alongside 3 marching bands.

try Perth Now.

Amazing - I wonder if they have told the clubs about this 'interpretation' of a non-existent rule?

Absolutely right. This may be much more effective at preventing stop play than any of the other rules the AFL has tried, though as usual there may be interpretation problems. Players leap on a pack and tackle anyone they are near, but they never get pinged for tackling someone who doesn't have the ball. No rule change needed there, just enforce the current one.

All very intriguing. But why would no selection panel be needed if Roos was appointed? Even if he is the standout candidate, surely you go through the motions. Are you assuming that the AFL just installs him?

I'm happy to kid myself. Look at the second half (when we'd be expected to fall in a heap). We outscored them (ie BEAT them despite Frawley being absent for most of it) and they kicked 7 goals 7 behinds. A team which scores 7 7 is not wasting too many opportunities. Fairly typical kicking, probably better than average in fact. I'm quite happy - not content (yet), just happy that we did pretty well against a side which is indeed much better than ours and won the premiership last year and may well do it again.

What is the actual rule? He certainly bounced the ball downwards before he was tackled. If it came back to him before he was tackled and he then quickly disposed of it legally, then I'm sure there should be no free kick. But what if he was tackled just before it did come back to him (which I think was the case). What then? ( I'm asking about the rule, not the umpire's decision since they clearly had problems understanding all the rules.)

You haven't convinced me. Yes you have to kick it. The question is what is the penalty if you don't. What if a player handpasses it to a team-mate rather than kicks it to him? Ball-up is it not? Not a free kick for goal. So if you take or pass it over the line, the only reason for a free kick is if you did it without being under pressure. The rule was brought in to for the reasons another poster gave. It would be a brave player who tried to do it under pressure repeatedly to defend a 5 point lead. But I can see it wouldn't prevent someone defending a 50 point lead. But then, why would anyone want to defend a 50 point lead by wasting time anyway.

Sorry, I don't follow you. Yes he had prior but he disposed of it properly by hand. And it was under pressure. So what was the free for? Must be a rule you haven't quoted or a bungle by the ump. Give their overall performance, the later sounds more likely.

I agree the 'closer to a flag' argument is fairly pointless, but I'm not sure it differs much at bottom from the question you say is a better one. Presumably a coach would like to coach a team that has a chance of a flag in the next 5 years, so the two questions have a lot of overlap.

If he exposed the MFC to the tanking investigation just to get rid of a CEO and a President then I'd have no respect for him at all, to put it very mildly. There are ways of removing people without clobbering the club, or even risking the destruction of the club.

yes he did. Question is, if he does get permission from the other club, does that override the AFL's rule that he can't talk till the season is over?

If Malceski had been facing he other way and walked (no pushing required) over the line then the umpire wouldn't have thought for a micosecond that it would be a free. For some reason seeing the pressure on you and reacting is worse than just feeling it behind you.

I'm surprised that the Foxsports poll shows around 40% think we should get a PP. Leaving aside the nature of these polls and the number of Demon-supporting hackers who know how to vote multiple times, such a high number is surprising given that most people voting would be avid supporters of other clubs.

Foxsports conducting a poll. Vote early and often: http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-360/me-bank-fair-or-unfair-melbourne-deserve-a-priority-pick-at-next-national-draft/story-fnhklban-1226669640852#.UclikeD5Kn_

Sounds like a good idea - in fact with hindsight it is amazing that all clubs haven't done this for years. Perhaps players don't like it. But one minor suggestion - provide a clipboard or something solid for them to write on.

I've often wondered if this technique fails at a ground with big grandstands behind the goals. It might confuse thinks to try to imagine your teammate X yards in from the goal line if there is a stand ramping up where he would be standing at ground level. Just a thought.....

I'm surprised that there are still some supporters who feel guilty in some way about accepting whatever the AFL gives us. Supporters of other clubs with 'specials' from the AFL have never expressed embarrassment to me. The significant thing in all this is that the AFL appears to be trying to SAVE the club. I could easily imagine that they might have decided to let us go down the gurgler, followed for example by the Dogs and then arrange a merger.

If the AFL decide the way to 'save' us is to give us a bucket-load of PP's (hmm, like GWS), that's fine by me. If supporters feel embarrassed about that in front of supporters of other teams then they need to harden up. (And if the Dogs need one too, that's fine by me.)

I don't understand that argument. We also have pi$$ed away money in recent years, so on that argument we don't deserve financial help. What do we 'deserve'? Deserve is not the right word. If the AFL wants us to not go down the gurgler and be competitive then they should help us in whichever ways achieve that goal most efficiently. If that involves a PP, so be it. To those Demon supporters who say 'we don't deserve it', I say get a hairshirt and do some old fashioned self-whipping if it makes you feel more pure. :>) To other people who say it, I'd just repeat what I said above.

or just that he played well, so gets to sit at the press conference and then someone asks him the question.

Whatever way the replacement of Board members was going to happen, it was going to be behind closed doors. I'd rather they be AFL doors than totally unknown doors. If members don't like it we can vote them out at the next AGM. Would be a bit late to change coaches of course, but after all don't most of us think the AFL will do a better job of choosing a coach than an independent MFC would.

Agree. Regardless of how much he bled red & blue (when it suited him) imagine if he had been made captain and showed this level of idiocy when speaking in public. Shudder....

Come on bing, fancy proposing that the club pursued a cunning strategy - enough to make you a considered a weirdo around here. I suspect the plan was just tied to the mid-year bye, but PJ may well have realized the benefits you point to.