Dr. Gonzo

Just went and picked this up at lunchtime from Dymocks at 234 Collins St after reading through this thread. Was thinking of buying it last night online but baulked at the $10 postage charge. Am interested to have a read through, does it include all CD stats that are generally unavailable to the public during the year? One stat I've been trying to find in particular is hit-outs to advantage so I'll be interested if that's included. Hopefully it's more than just your basic K, H, M, Disp Eff. etc

Why do we have to have 22 matches? It really is ridiculous. Just have a 17 game season over 18 or 19 rounds, you can chuck in some State of Origin games if you want (though don't have to) and get rid of the absurdity of having to weigh up if you've got a good or bad deal by the AFL for next year's fixture. The fact the league can use the fixture as a reward/penalty against certain clubs is downright dumb. Just switch home and away each year and have each team travel once to WA/SA/NSW/QLD each year. Then we can get to evening up the timeslots etc to ensure a really fair draw. If you MUST have 22 matches then make it completely transparent and base it on the previous seasons ladder. Make 3 groups (1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16; 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17; & 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18) and you play everyone in your group twice. No return blockbusters/derbies guaranteed but at least it's transparent and no-one can complain. The only other way around it is to create conferences/divisions which the AFL supporters aren't ready for and which create their own issues anyway (who is in each conference/division the primary one). This is my main beef with the AFL at the moment and it is a farce that they refuse to adopt an easy solution instead of compromising the integrity of the competition for some perceived (but not real/proven) extra dollars.

Yep - so experimenting with players/list management is tanking even if the moves come off??? The AFL would want to hope there's more "evidence" than what has leaked so far if they pursue charges (which isnt confirmed yet BTW) because even an amateur supporter, let alone a qualified legal mind, would rip this investigation/allegations to shreds in half an hour.

Haha it's such a farce - didn't Jamar kick 5 goals that day.

He's not injured again is he?

Hear, hear. My club, right or wrong!

The incident itself is nothing much, it's just the stupidity on parade that gets me. They need to pull their heads in and show they are dedicated to turning around the shitheap this team has become under their watch instead of making public spectacles of themselves amongst well-known congregations of drunk bogans with the sports press everywhere. It just shows an astounding lack of judgment but yeah, win a few games and maybe people won't care so much.

Underachievers - and proud of it.

Football players + cricket bogans + beer = stupidity.

I agree - someone should tell Haddad this isn't some 3rd world police state that kind of stuff doesn't fly here.

Yep that thought had crossed my mind - don't forget this whole thing kicked off while Demetriou was overseas on a jaunt to the Olympics/Europe.

Pretty sure that's impossible - the investigation doesn't determine guilt or otherwise, it presents the facts to the Commission who will decide whether to lay charges or not.

Scapegoat? http://www.afl.com.au/news/2012-12-19/tank-verdict-looms-for-dees

As above, her information would only be as good as her sources though. Previous posts, I am guessing, were related to the workings of the MFC. This is the workings of the AFL and their integrity department we are talking about which will effect the MFC, a small distinction but a distinction nonetheless.

I'd take anything she says with a grain of salt just like everything else on here. Even with a good track record she would only be reiterating speculation she has heard from "insiders" at the club. Who knows what that may amount to. Make no mistake though, if they do charge us with tanking it will be one of the biggest stories in the history of the game so I'd prepare to batten down the hatches.

Look I don't disagree with the sentiment but in a situation like this, even if you win, you lose. The AFL will control our destiny long after any court case ends. If we were in the position of a Collingwood or West Coast I might agree but we rely on the AFL to prop us up from going out of business, let alone any other considerations like fixturing/broadcasting etc. And really, despite what anyone might say here I find it hard to believe anyone thinks it wasn't our intention to secure picks 1 & 2. Knowing and proving are obviously two different things which is why all this will depend on what kind of evidence the AFL has. If they have documented evidence of a clear strategy to ensure we lose games it's a no contest. If it's just subjective opinions against other subjective opinions well thats another matter.

You can't fight city hall (or rather you can but you'll lose).

For those interested; I've always thought it would make a great doco to do something on the merger, not just between us but also proposed mergers between Fitzroy/Bulldogs, Fitzroy/North etc that also fell through. Would love to have the time and resources to do it one day (would need to see if I could source footage of the Dallas Brooks Hall and Camberwell Civic Centre other than the brief clips on That Was The Season That Was 1996 - the atmosphere in those halls that night was fiercely electric and not necessarily in a good way.)

I wasn't around but I hear 1981-1986 were pretty horrible (in fact 1966-1986 were pretty horrible!) but we finished 3rd (and should have been 2nd) in 1987.

1995 we just missed finals, 1996 & 1997 were horrible years think we won the spoon in 1997 then made prelim in 1998. We also had a poor finish in 1999 then made the GF the next year. We also boomeranged from a poor finish in 1993 (10th? albeit with a 50% winning record) to a prelim in 1994 and then of course there were the 2001-2006 yo-yo years under Daniher although admittedly we didn't rise to top 4 during those years. And of course we went from a poor finish in 1953 to GF the next year but that's all ancient history now.

Yeah me too SD64 - however I've changed my reserved seats this year (only changed them two weeks ago) so that may be the reason??

The bankers and profiteers would disagree.

That's true for some people. For me some of the best times I have had have been on drugs and I seriously believe I would not be the person I am today if it weren't for marijuana, LSD & MDMA. I've used alcohol many times as well and would say that it can be good also, but for the most part is one of the most useless drugs with some of the worst side-effects. Drugs are certainly not "evil"; they are not good either, they just are. Their benefits or otherwise come down to the person using them, similarly to alcohol. Some people drink alcohol and it acts as a social lubricant others use it and they turn depressed or aggressive usually because they are stupid or have underlying problems to begin with. Similarly with other drugs they all have their pro's and con's it is not a one way street. Drugs like LSD & MDMA can and should be used in psychotherapy but due to the fundamentalist policies of the US imposed on the rest of the world over the last 40 years unfortunately this has not been the case. The problem with footballers using drugs (aside from the fact they make their living from keeping their bodies in peak physical shape) is that for the most part, footballers are meatheads with low levels of education and so they are far more likely to feel the negative effects of drugs and are far more likely to use drugs like meth or coke which have fewer redeeming qualities when used in those circumstances and are probably as likely as alcohol to get them into trouble. Despite that I really don't see why players should be tested unless the claims are that these drugs are performance enhancing. If not then they should not be tested (particularly off-season) and it should not even really be an issue unless it starts to effect theit performance or they begin to suffer from addiction. As in society at large the best course clubs or the AFL can take is to educate players on the effects of the drugs both short and long term and move away from a punitive system. Of course if a player is found using drugs in the lead-up to a game the club has every right to suspend them as they would if they went out on the booze.

Finals. That is the aim and my expectation at the start of every year. Then these expectations are readjusted depending on how well/poorly we are doing

I agree OD it may seem stupid or trivial but the stupid thing is how difficult it seems to be to get something like this right.