bing181

Connolly denies it all - as well he should/needs to: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/connolly-claims-conspiracy-20130114-2cpwu.html Not sure if "I don't remember any meetings" counts ...

In New York with the family it seems, due back sometime soon.

You seem sprightly enough to me, but if that's the case, perhaps you could consider becoming Very Old Dee?

Next training session, can someone simply not ask him? Becoming the question of the off-season.

But no premierships. Near enough good enough? In any case, much of what we've had to put up with of late is as a result of Danihers' "short term gain" policy. Play in a few finals, but leave the club in a sorry state as a consequence? No thanks. I'd take Neeld over both. Yes, already. Long-term culture-changer.

Speculation. Also, IMHO, simplistic. The Jurrah situation is, at the very least, complicated, and even if you're right, not sure what the point is or even how the club is to blame. In any case, Flack wasn't the only person to depart, pretty well the entire coaching and support staff had changed, which as we know, was difficult for many of the players.

Always great to be excited by a new player coming in. I know this has been mentioned before, but in case anyone missed his Combine results: "Adding to his top-three 3km ranking, Barry was equal ninth in the shuttle run (level 14.2), had a third-best score in the kicking test and was top-10 in the running vertical jump (84cm) and repeat sprints (25.19 seconds)." But can he put it all together when he's hot and hassled out on the MCG? Still 67 days for him to convince the selection committee.

Perhaps not worth starting a new thread for (mods?), but news from today's 3k Time Trial: Melbourne Football Club Christopher José Cincotta we like to keep the times in house but the top places, in order are: Dan Nicholson, Tom McDonald, Rohan Bail, Jordie McKenzie, Nathan Jones, Joel Macdonald and Dom Barry. And further ... Jay Clark ‏@ClarkyHeraldSun Dees time trail first home Dan Nicholson (9min22) and Tom McDonald. At Princes Park. Jay Clark ‏@ClarkyHeraldSun Young Dee Jack Viney in super nick. Finished 8th in about 10min15sec. All set for a big first year.

Think you're writing him off too soon. Still comparatively young, and has yet to complete a pre-season (touch wood that he'll make it through this one). Thought in a couple of games later last year he was starting to show something. Still too early to say for mine. As for who'll step up ... the two main contenders in Strauss and Jetta have already earned a couple of posts. I also wonder what Sellar might be able to do, with another year under his belt, and a bit more pressure for his place, and you would think that a year in the system and a full pre-season won't hurt Magner's chances either.

12

Perhaps not .... Tank probe: Dozen witness statements could cook careers in Melbourne investigation "FIGURES connected to the Melbourne tanking investigation have been told up to a dozen people have "rolled over" about how the club has managed past lists. The statements potentially incriminate Demons administrators amid growing fears the club and individuals could face serious league sanctions."

I'm going to have a bob each way. A couple of them will do very well. A couple will do OK. The rest: not so sure.There are only so many Cinderalla stories in the AFL. As to putting names to that ...

Or you could simply take it as having been written pre-Xmas break, without getting into polemics re the info that the club puts out.

Perhaps not officially ... As above, we didn't use 3 and 13 on Hogan and Barry. We used 3 and 13 on Hogan, Barry AND Dawes PLUS the option to take Viney at 27 - which then enabled us to take Toumpas at 4 rather than having to take Viney there. Your scenario would never have played out. We could never have had Viney, Toumpas AND Wines without doing the Hogan deal as a sweetener to let Viney slide.

Not mutually exclusive.

At least someone gets it.

That's the issue right there. They're professional, high-profile footballers (with wages and responsibilities to match). They're not "who amongst us".

Wondered how long it would be before you'd pop in.

That would be ... "pissing THEIR pants WITH laughter". (No need to thank me.)

For interest's sake, current membership. We ain't doing too badly at all. Current Membership totals as of 19/12/2012. Collingwood - 55,000 - (Target 75,000) West Coast - 44,443 Hawthorn - 42,729 - (Target 65,000) Essendon - 31,369 Richmond - 28,889 - (Target 60,000) Carlton - 26,810 - (Target - 50,000) St. Kilda - 20,715 Melbourne - 20,145 - (Target - 40,000) Fremantle - 20,000+ (as of November) Geelong - 19,883 Adelaide - 17,000+ (as of 4/12) - (Target - 50,000) North Melb - 18,203 Sydney - 16,000+ Western B - 15,970 Port Adel. - 14,826 Brisbane - 12,493 Gold Coast - 6,714 (Target 10,000) Greater WS - 6,179 (Target 10,000)

Sure, but there's a difference between hard and suicidal. It depends what "proof" they have.

Therein lies the problem in this argument. First up, there's the assumption that Bailey was winning against "better teams", which is just not true. Adelaide at the MCG in 2011 was as easy as it got. West Coast and Richmond in 2010 were woeful. With one or two exceptions, which a few people here still want to take as some kind of norm, we only ever won against the "easy" teams, and were roundly thrashed by the better ones. For where we really were, have a look at our results against a mid-range team like North in 2010 - 2011. Lost every game. Secondly, the list was worse under Bailey? Not in reality. How many of Bailey's wins came with Garland and Rivers in the forward line, and Spencer as first ruck? Many of the players who performed well for Bailey's wins were unavailable or out of form and heading for the chopper under Neeld. Where were our leading goal kickers from 2010 and 2011 (for example)? Gysberts, Sylvia, Martin, Jamar, Watts, Petterd, Jurrah etc. were all solid (or important) contributors to those Bailey wins, but all were injured or paying the price for being injured for long periods in 2012. Throw in others effectively missing or out of form, e.g. Green (getting to be passed it in 2012), Moloney (lost and confused) and even Scully (useful in 2010) how did Neeld have a better team? Or, to put it another way: if Neeld's list was so much better than Baileys, how come we let a third of them leave?? As for the rest of your post ... it's possible, in a discussion, to hold a certain view, without automatically negating the opposing view. Saying that Bailey's team and wins were poor, isn't necessarily saying that in 2012 everything was hunky dory.

You mean the record where we never beat ANY of the Victorian teams (except the odd fluke and our yearly wins against a developing Richmond), and where a lot of the wins came from beating out of town teams at the MCG? Throw into that the odd interstate win (Port in Darwin, Lions at the Gabba) and you have Bailey's wins. As for the 6% against non-startup teams, even that's a stat of your own fabrication. Go back a few years and Richmond were as bad or worse than GC or GWS, and some of the others at that time weren't much better - it wasn't for nothing that Freeo, Adelaide, Essendon and the Dogs all sacked their coaches. Your stats don't really tell much of a story, yet alone the whole story.

I would have thought so as well. Initial prognosis was that he would start running after Xmas, so he seems to be a month or so ahead of schedule ... FWIW.

Didn't we already do that just a few years back?