The Chazz

If this happens, my family and I won't be renewing our membership.

And I am to believe he was the first one born, as even his brother didn't want to push in front of him...

You've been waiting a long time to use that one haven't you McQueen? (well worth the wait, bravo tango whisky).

You rate Neeld a lot higher than I do.

WYL, I wish we were tired of getting 2nd best. Of recent times it feels like we've had to settle for 138th best!

You would think the Chairman will either be Freeman or Stockdale (who can't start until post-federal election from memory). Then I would expect only 1 or 2 more AFL approved/enforced additions.

I agree with part of your point, but you don't agree with the main point - for Roos to firm from $7 to $1.80 or whatever it was, it's more than a PR stunt. You say it's becasue he's the only one we have contacted - if that were the case, why do they have a market for it anyway? Money has been wagered on Roos, I'd expect it to be a significant amount, and more than just because he's the "only one PJ has spoken to". This type of betting is a gimmick, but it's not screaming for attention as you say. You clearly have no idea how corporate bookmakers operate, so it's best to leave the argument there.

The best part for me B59, in regards to the sieve no longer leaking, is that the media have left us alone and moved on to their next target, which rightly so is Carlton! All it would take is for us to have a blow out against Geelong this week, but after months and months of getting rogered, it's good to be able to sit down without any grimace for a while. A bit like having a relationship break from BBO!

So, this "PR stunt", what is it that they hope to achieve? More punters? More money wagered on the Melbourne Football Club coaching gig? The amount of dollars these agencies spend on advertising, sponsorship, etc, it's in the millions. Why on earth would they try and "leak" a "plunge" to a newspaper outlet on a novelty bet that rarely attracts interest? If they want a cheap PR stunt, I'm sure there would be a lot better markets/bet types that could cause a greater storm. Why not suspend Wooden Spoon betting for an hour, then re-open it with Essendon as favourites to win the spoon? I don't disagree about them not knowing any more than us, but the difference is that they can see how much money is coming in and from whom it is coming from. They will officially be told the same day as we are, but at this stage (again, without loojing at the bets placed), it would appear they have their suspicions.

How many of these "novelty" bets have made the papers in the past? They always have some form of novelty bet, mainly because there are people out there that will have a wager on anything possible. Also, can anyone name the betting agency that caused this "good story"? The Herald Sun had a small quote from a Centrebet rep, but I can't see 1000's of people running out to open an account with them. The betting agencies that I wager with have not been mentioned, but even they slashed his odds. To call it a PR stunt is nothing but laughable, especially given the lack of coverage individual betting agencies received from it. I also don't think it would've created an interest for pro-punters, so the increase in the pools wouldn't have changed much at all from when it was reported. There are 2 sceanrios for me; 1. An unusually high amount of bets came for Roos at one or multiple agency/ies in a period of say 48 hours (I'm talking a number of $20 or $50 bets given that they are the maximum). The individual bets intially wouldn't cause too much concern for the agency, however, their system would've flagged a high increase in bets for Roos after a while. 2. It's "dummy" money, meaning that someone/s have put a few silly bets on Roos to ensure the plunge has occured, therefore blowing the odds of other candidates, thus giving them better value for the likes of Williams or Eade. I refuse to believe anything outside my above 2 points, and would have this confirmed if I could get a look at the total pools before the bets started coming in, and after. I think a few people on here would be surprised at how much has actually been punted on Roos during this plunge (my estimate is in the $2500-$5000 range, but obviously not as a single bet). It wouldn't be hard for a group of people to build up a few thousand worth of bets in a 24-48 hour period, especially given that there would be half a dozen agencies running a market.

My opinion, and I will be laughed out of town, is that you could put Morton in that category of "Club Development Issues". He played enough games early in his career to suggest that he could be a decent player, even when we flogged Sydney is 2010 and he played on Goodes showed he had ability (sure, Goodes kicked 4, but I think Cale kicked 2 and I wouldn't say he was defeated by Goodes. Think the same happened in a game in Canberra too from memory). Fire away...

May have previously been mentioned, but don't individual clubs have to "apply" for a Priority Pick? If so, WTF are the Bulldogs whinging about whne they say we shouldn't get one? Why don't they just apply for one themsleves? There's a process in place, the MFC is just doing what is available to all clubs.

Tissues? It's been that long since I've seen anything like that that I needed a garbage bag.

It potentially shows what we have with Pedersen if he can't beat Kosi, moreso than what we have with Dunn. I would imagine with a backline of Frawley, Garland and Tom Mc, the return of Grimes would see Dunn in a situation of being forced out of the team.

Sorry back at you, I'm not going to accept you thinking I'm a sheep. I say Dunn was crap on Saturday night becasue that's what I observed with my own eyes, not becasue that's what the generally feeling on Demonland was.

Only thing stopping him would be the fact he can't kick. We need goal scoring small forwards, so that gives me very little confidecne that DN is our man.

We all see the game differently, but given the amount of posters calling for Dunn to be dropped in the "Changes vds Sydney" thread, it looks like you both are in the minority. I am normally a fan of Dunn, but Saturday was a poor performance.

Dunn was below AFL standard Saturday night and should be dropped.

2 things "Cards"; 1. The OP wasn't bashing Neeld at all. And what he posted was very similar to what Trengove actually said. 2. I was replying to Uncle's attempt at humour, not his clarification of what JT actually said.

You are like that annoying uncle at the table for Christmas lunch. You're there because you are family, but everyone thinks you're annoying, and your jokes aren't funny. You will always post on here because you're a part of the Demonland family, but that's where it stops.

Froggy, I'm quite over this "if his heart is not in it" talk. At the current time, Neil Craig would be the only one that is 100% in it. Eade and Williams both have other employment obligations, so there's no way they could say that their heart is 100% in it. The only thing that either have said is that they have a desire to coach at senior level again. I would ask are they just interested in the MFC gig because it's the only one available at this stage? Eade and Williams will be waiting until their season finishes before they decide if their heart is in it. Roos is waiting to see changes at the Club before he fully commits.

I meant Caveat Emptor! Think he was running around Vic in the late 90's to mid 00's.

Was that the horse you backed at Port Augusta? He was a pretty handy horse in his day, sort of a bread and butter type runner, City performer I think.

Bookies at a Port Augusta meeting in '84 would absolutely wind the odds back of a horse that a random such as yourself has just punted $50 on a horse. That'd be like putting $500 on it today. I was at the Burrumbeet Cup one year B59, and the bookies there let you bet on Melbourne races. A considerable bet was taken with 1 bookie for a Tassie horse at around 33-1, they turned it straight in to 25-1 (when I got on), which is not a huge plunge (at that stage), it was just the fact that solid money had come for a roughy from interstate. It started at 8-1 and won by the length of the straight. The key point that we don't know is what is the size of the pools that these corporates are holding? The alarm bells won't ring if someone walked up and had $50 on Roos. Even after a 2nd bet of $50 within a couple of minutes of the first won't concern the bookies, they might bring him in from $5.50 to $5, but that'd be about it. If they took multiple bets over the space of say 24 hours (I'm tipping it would have to be a minimum of a few thousand in total), especially if there had been minimal interest prior to that, then they would slash odds considerably for sure. So while it may not take huge dollars to bring his odds down, it'd still have to be in the low to mid thousands. My question is why would those bets be placed? I have a friend that works at Centrebet, I will try and find out some information from him (given it was Centrebet that the HS interviewed yesterday). FWIW - Roos has drifted on IAS Bet - now out to $2.50. Eade has firmed to $4.75, Williams steady.

Not sure if this made sense PJ! I was meaning that Nik Nat's selection last year would challenge any AA/Maxwell decision.