sue

Well I wasn't aware that WCE were shielded - I don't live in WA and journos elsewhere didn't bring it to my attention. I'm not sure which is worse - a cover up of possible offences or excuses (and worse) made for the proven guilty. Actually I do in terms of the effect on me - Essendon was particularly grating, especially after we got pilloried for tanking when lots of others had tanked, some more blatantly. Essendon didn't need to try to make that 'defence' before journos were falling over themselves to protect and bolster them!

Care factor is more than zero for me. While WCE may have been guilty, at least it wasn't proved by ASADA and then lamely excused by large sections of the media like Essendrug was. So I'm hoping for a WCE big win.

Fair cop. By way of mitigation, I couldn't microwave my membership card in '65 since they didn't exist then.

Same for me (though closer to 65 years). And before someone blames my complacency as a supporter for our lack of flags since '64, I might point out that in all those years I have neither played, coached or administered the club. And I have no expertise to affect any of that. What I do or feel has no effect, and nor do I expect it to.

But at least he said "I think" rather than just assuming that anything the club does must ipso facto be wrong like you seem to do. And what is wrong with him not knowing '10 days in'? That's just a mindless putdown. If the Club revealed all their plans you'd complain that they aren't professional. You are so negative that anything but disapproval of everything the club does allows you to label other posters as plodders or bootlickers. Insulting people doesn't improve your arguments. You will convince people of your views more if you are politer. No, I am not doing this in school time.

Please put me on ignore too.

Thanks to those pro-mission statement posters who have posted why they think they are useful. But I don't think you have answered or even addressed my very simple questions in post #30, viz: Let me make a start. Perhaps a new small insurance company might want to emphasise different values etc than an established big one. However I'd see this as tinkering around the edges of what every insurance company might see as its mission. But OK, I'll concede it might be useful to emphasise the points where that company departs from the 'standard' mission of insurance companies. But when it comes to football I just don't see why they'd be any difference between clubs regardless of ladder position/development phase. There might be different plans for addressing the next few years, but why would the club "mission statement" be any different from any other club in any truly meaningful way?

Likely - dogs don't have fingers. Have you ever tried to type using a paw? That's why there are lots of typos (not spelling mistakes as someone grumbled rather rudely).

Whatever the case, I love the use of the lazy words "up to" which is so common these days. When you don't know, pick a number and say "up to" as in "Up to 3 starting players". It can can mean 0,1,2 or 3 so you are safe as long as there are not 4 or more.

Put me down as a skeptic. Please explain why there is any difference in the mission statements of say, all insurance companies. Or indeed all footy teams. Surely they should all be pretty identical within each industry. And if so, what is their worth?

Interesting. What's unavoidably missing from that list is some measure of the depth each club has. I expect we'd score even worse if that could be taken into account.

I dimly recall in August 2018 another team beat WCE at home and then made it to the prelim against them and got thrashed by WCE. Let's see how it plays out.

I too am #$@!# off with a game we could have won, but I seem to recall everyone here predicting a huge loss with Brown kicking a bag. I don't suppose I can expect to see any posts saying what we did right to avoid that.

It was paid for abuse

Sadly that won't work because the AFL will just increase the outrageousness of its changes till we are all screaming in pain. It's about time the clubs banded together to rein in the AFL.

I thought some might find this article interesting. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/aug/23/has-the-afl-reached-a-point-where-it-is-just-about-impossible-to-adjudicate Having lost all interest in the season and not much caring who wins in most matches I've watched, I have been able to judge umpiring decisions with less emotional bias than usual. It's worse than ever before. I can't wait to see what new rules the AFL introduces to make umpiring even harder in 2020.

But I do see the point. Sorry, I don't put much weight in your examples.

This line from that article seems to imply many won't be back: You’ve got to make some really harsh decisions......

Once again this is something relevant to us long suffering supporters, but of only minor relevance to current players. I can imagine an excited player being interviewed after the GF siren and being asked how does it feel to break the drought. Response, "oh, yeah, that too".

I'm not denying we may be unfit to run out quarters but surely if a team is not scoring much generally then it is likely to be at the bottom of any table showing low scoring at any period in a quarter, not just the end. That data doesn't necessarily show that we are worse in those 5 minutes than in any other 5 minutes. Perhaps it should be normalised by the total a team scores? Or am I missing something?

Good to see the Geelong whingers lose.

What!?! Surely you're not saying the FD has got it right. This thread will explode.

Part of the AFL's 'more goals' strategy? Though set shots are the most boring of goals, I guess they provide ad breaks.

That may well be true, however if he got it wrong in those 3/4 years, I'd rather he does something about it now that he has realised it than just bumble along.

No, DOX, I think you extrapolated rather than interpreted what he actually said. Your extrapolation may well be right (I have no idea) but it was beyond the literal meaning of his words.