praha

He's part of the MMM footy calling team. That should answer your question.

I thought the amount of Demons support was disappointing. Although I didn't really expect us to out number them...

Collingwood supporters, individually, are fine. But when they're in a group, they are a cancer. A plague on society.

I wouldn't say "fail", as our expectations are for a 2-4 win season. If we go winless, then yeah, that would be a failure of a season.

I was surprised it took so long for someone to mention Grgic. Well done.

78,932

Malthouse is a joke. I seriously felt like punching the screen when I saw his press conference on the weekend. Journo: "Do you think your boys came to play today?" Malthouse: "What do you think? I mean, what kind of question is that? 'did they come to play?' What does that mean? When people say that I don't understand the question." It's a figure of speech your arrogant [censored].

I think he means it's too early to discuss draft picks because they can bolt and improve throughout the year...like Watts.

I don't expect us to be great this year either. Or next year. Or the year after. When he says "upsets", I suspect he means against teams like Essendon/North/Sydney/WC/other bottom-8 sides that we will no doubt go in as underdogs.

I don't care if it's April Fools. I feel like coming to your house and punching you in the side of the head just for saying it lol

April Fools Day? I believe it when I see it...

Wow. That's the worst ad I've ever seen.

Collingwood sit at the Ponsford end at both away and home games at the G. So Melbourne will be at the Punt Road (South Stand) goals. Beyond that, anywhere you sit will be pretty random in regards to support.

I'm more interested as to why they didn't discuss the Melb v. North game then why KB walked out on CB, or did I miss an entire segment?

Now, maybe I'm looking into much into this, but am I the only one who thinks an early-season fixture against Collingwood kind of makes the Queens Birthday clash not as anticipated? I mean, the QB clash is known for Melb v. Collingwood, the only (or first of 2) clashes of the season between the two clubs, and it always has a strong sense of competitiveness, because it's the first time we face each other. The reason I bring this up is because I genuinely believe that Demetriou has tried in the past, as best his power, to get a team to move out of Melbourne. He almost forced North, and then came out with comments such as, "your brand is worthless/you have no brand" in regards to Melbourne. I don't think it was right for him to make that statement, especially considering it was on the backfoot of the Roos deciding to stay in Melbourne and how bad the MFC was going off-field. Then, last year he made a statement saying that we risk losing the QB match if we couldn't pull 50,000 to the game. WTF? Has he no sense of tradition? Culture? Even if the QB isn't as strong as the ANZAC game, it's probably the second most well known game on the fixture - everyone associates QB with Melbourne and Collingwood. I believe it was a personal swipe at Melbourne and I never believe a word that comes out of his mouth in regards to our club. I don't believe he genuinely wants all 10 teams to remain in Melbourne. Anyway, I think it's ridiculous that we're playing them this early on with the QB game 10 weeks ago in Round 11. It just makes it feel less special (for me anyway). 2 games against the Pies is fine, but why not like last year? Imagine having Collingwood vs Essendon in Round 1, and then 6-7 weeks later in for ANZAC Day.

He also looks a hell of a lot like Sylvia on the field at first glance. What a coincidence, hey Just to confirm, you pronounce his name "Chay-nee" right?

Quite a disgraceful stat. And it really does no justice for the way we played all day (which wasn't that bad).

The Adelaide cheer squad were at the Punt Road end on Saturday, so yeah, I guess we'll be at the typical "home game" side (where they were today against North).

You're criticising a gameplan that can only really be implemented successfully with an experienced team (as with other gameplans). No matter how Bailey teaches this team, they won't get it right so soon. What do you expect? Patience my friend. I could understand your gripes if this was an experience team with plenty of finals experience, but it's not.

Great news!

Just curious, do kids also have to wear a collar to get into the MCC?

Melbourne's problems now range from Daniher, to a terrible board, to Cameron. A. You had a board that didn't want to sack Daniher, probably for financial reasons, when he should have been let go after the 15th "down year" (that's an exaggeration for those who lack any sense of humour). He was under contract, and sacking him would have forced them to pay out his contract. He should have been sacked at the end of 2003. B. Cameron's good:bad recruiting ratio was about 1:100. C. The board gave Daniher too many chances (entire 2003, poor end to 2004, 7 straight losses in 2005, poor end to 2006). D. Daniher had too much faith in players who just won't win you a premiership. He wanted to "rebuild" after the 2002 finals loss to Adelaide. He failed. Players like Lamb, Godfrey etc. would have been sacked after their first game. The reason we suck now is mostly because of Daniher's list management though. Bailey took over a list ravaged by players that break down in injury and just aren't up to AFL scratch. Last year was the beginning. It was inevitable. 2009 is the beginning. Expect under 2-3 years down the bottom before a revival. I haven't seen as big a rebuilding at the club since I've been a Melbourne supporter (early 90s). We've gone from a poor list with several veteran players, to a young list with two genuine veteran players and a bunch of 14 year olds, four of which are debuted on Sunday. Being down the bottom isn't so bad when a whole bunch of young guys are playing. Being down the bottom is terrible when you have a bunch of players who were meant to take you to a flag playing.

To get a better player maybe? I dunno? Just because you trade a player away, doesn't mean you don't "rate him". I could name 10 players off the top of my head that have been traded for another good player that I'm sure the original coach would have "rated"

By that logic, every player ever traded ever was never rated by their coach. Rubbish.

That's 2,000 in about a week. I'm sure I remember it lingering around 22k a week ago. Weekend game at Casey must have seen a few sign-ups, plus sponsorship announcement - some corporate memberships I'm assuming?