Rogue

No fire, dragon, or lemons, thanks. The 'demons' moniker should still live on, but whether that's part of our official name, and how it's used in marketing, I'm not terribly fussed.

Good to hear Newton and Petterd played, and went alright. How was Buckley's defensive workrate?

Thanks, Freo.

Absolutely. 'Tracking well' for the spoon >_>

Fwiw, he's previously been critical of our facilities - said it did/might have cost us a flag - and those comments have been discussed on here.

How long did it take for Warnock to show this type of form at AFL level? He's 24, isn't he? Frawley's still got time.

A little off-topic, but this is quite cool:

As vanlo's pointed out, McDonald's already played down back this season (ie. Hawks game).

Haha

haha - there are unintended consequences for everything

Ins/Outs: Davey for Moloney CJ for Bell Frawley for Rivers The 'ins' don't stack up too badly compared to what we saw from the 'outs' last week. I'm disappointed Whelan didn't make it into the side, as I enjoy watching him play and he's had a frustrating run with injuries. Still, dropping Bode after one match wouldn't help his development...although I'm not sold on him.

If you're an AFL member with MFC Club support (which I hope you are, if you're an AFL member!) it may be the same as entering with a MFC membership. That said, I'd also be interested to hear more about this.

I'm surprised that one of the labels given to him is that of 'not caring'. I'd suggest it's probably the opposite. While harash, the 'slow' tag is closer to the money. Deanox (?) is correct in asserting that he doesn't have that 'burst' at the moment. I'm not sure whether he'll ever develop it, but if he did, he'd be a very, very, good player. As for suggesting he's in danger of losing his spot in the team, that's ridiculous. He'd be one of the first written down each week.

Nice work. Most of your assertions will probably be on the money, because they're pretty broad, but still a decent read. So true

I agree. Whelan was one of the a couple of guys Bailey made special mention of as possible inclusions at the after-match function on Monday.

We have to drive all categories of membership. Obviously the more money the better, but MCC members are a good target to boost our membership. I don't think membership fees are the only bonus of a high membership tally, so the more the merrier. I totally agree. Regarding your $30 idea, the $40 MCC/MFC membership already exists (I'm unsure if you were already aware of that), so if you think your card idea is going to drive sign-ups, perhaps it can be incorporated into the existing low-fee MCC/MFC membership. I think it's easy to sit here and say 'hey, you're already putting in $500+ for your MCC membership, I can't believe you don't pay an extra $40 for an MCC/MFC associate membership'. However, everyone has to have a limit on spending somewhere, and as you've acknowledged, many of the lapsed members that were contacted cited financial issues as the reason for not renewing. I'm not saying that people shouldn't sign up, but what I am saying is that it's easy to judge. I agree that it'd be great if more MCC members who supported the Dees signed up, but I'm not going to crucify those who can't/don't. PS. Rather than a $165 '11 game basic', the step up from the $40 MCC membership is the MFC/MCC premium membership which is ~$150, and also includes a juniour membership (as mentioned above).

It'd be better to just donate the $2, but obviously the 'Demonlotto' makes it slightly more attractive than a donation from the 'customer' perspective.

Haha. It's frustrating because it seems that happens to us a fair bit; often because a 'second' footy has driblled onto the ground.

Exactly.

Interesting to hear that he mentioned Casey - all I'd heard was a big push re: Melbourne/MCG as our home, and wondered what would happen with Casey. That's a shame. I'll try and keep us updated with some further news on Neita's trials and tribulations. Haha, nice recovery

KA-POW.

Virtually every week the Dees emergencies come from the extended interchange.

What is it?

I'm not sure about that. The $40 MFC/MCC member is already paying out a substantial amount of money for their MCC membership, and there's little value in them buying the more expensive MCC/MFC membership. $165 is the 'bottom/basic' membership option for an adult ('Red and Blue' adult 11) without an MCC membership. This is the membership of choice for many who don't attend games but wish to buy a membership. Correct - that was the most common reason reported afaik. It stands to reason that in each year you'll lose members for whatever reason (whether it's financial, inability to attend games, etc.) and also pick up new/lapsed members - irrespective of form and the like.

With a couple of the 'ins' listed on the bench, it seems that way. Perhaps one of Morton or Bate will miss.