Traja Dee

Burgo, your commentary is awesome. I'm in my study trying to catch up on some work and really thrilled by the detailed, structured, Melbourne-orientated commentary. Much better than the commentary on the AFL match-day site and almost as good as having the radio on. Now I had better try to switch off, do some work and revisit in, say, 10 45 minutes time or so.

Fantastic film - well done. It was interesting to see the extent to which hard core footy fans go to support their team; despite the hairstyle that I love, Angelo was the most "balanced". I'm definitely going to summon the courage to say g'day if I get a chance. Well done.

I was in my teens when he started. I remember that he was the middle player in a trio of fine centre players: 1982 was Brownlow Brian Wilson, 1983 was Chris Connolly and 1984 was Brett Bailey, though each one was not quite as good as the previous according to my memory. I don't remember much of him after that but I do remember that the players gave him a special tribute when they won the night premiership in 1987 when he was recovering from a knee injury. The players' tributes would indicate that he had a special bond with them. Incidentally, Brett Bailey was a mere utility/flanker by that time but he does hold a special place as the player who kicked the goal to give us the lead in the dying moments of that grand final. One of my last memories of him as a player was in 1991 when they were training at Junction Oval. They had just received a thumping in round 1 at Subiaco and many commentators were ready to write them off after 4 consecutive years in the finals. I walked close to the players on my way to a game of tennis and quite close to Chris who was performing a handball drill. I said "Good Luck Chris" (I know, I'm really kool!) and he respond with a spirited "We'll bounce back" sort of response that indicated strong presence and confidence. They did bounce back with a strong win in round 2. Hope this helps. Go Dees. '

I like Luna Park. My boys were barely engaged with AFL and the Dees prior to the start of 2012. Attending Luna Park had appeal on its own and thus became useful for keeping that level of interest flickering. Last year (2012), footy cards took off in school like wildfire and now my 8yo takes more interest in footy than even I do. What's more, he is an absolute, rusted on Demon despite being the only one at his school.

Awesome work, lucky 13th. Watching it a second time made me realise a few things: The MFC is a never-ending-story with lots of characters and an ever-changing landscape. It was great to see some heroes from my childhood and weird to see other players with a more "tainted" career (Cam Bruce, Brocky, even Big Carl who flip-flopped between Melbourne and St.Kilda during the 70's - refer to Whispering Jack's 1973 retrospective for Carl's first arrival). The editing and matching the music is superb - of a professional quality to my untrained eye. Great job - well done. Go Dees.

Jack Gunston has an interesting and unorthodox kicking style but is renowned for his accuracy (barring the poster in the last quarter of a fairly tight angle). Most players hold the ball with the axis parallel with their forearms, whereas Jack holds the ball with the axis almost upright. My boys are 8 and 6 and just learning to kick. The problem that I have is that I have learnt to hold the ball with a perpendicular axis, like Jack Gunston, and struggle to guide the ball down, unlike Jack Gunston. If it is as still day, I reckon my accuracy is OK but I'm shite if the wind is up and the ball deviates before striking the boot. I've tried to mimic the Auskick technique with the ball parallel with the forearms but this technique seems to rely on me spinning the ball at just the right speed to be perpendicular when it strikes the boot - often my kicks end up like a helicopter with my attempts at this technique. I'm terribly worried that my boys will be more like Buddy than Mitch and that they'll end up costing Melbourne a premiership! Could the biomechanics on this site explain the theory that Jack Gunston's style is inferior to Mitch Clark's. Thanks.

Great OP, It's Time, but its a shame that its gone off topic a little. Getting back on topic, I watched the game from half-way back on level 4 and in the pocket closest to the city. While I don't chose to sit there normally, it was great to get a different perspective. I felt that the Swans game massively vindicated Neeld's gameplan. Time after time, the Swans kicked down the line but they seemed to overdo it at times: the majority of clearances from defence at the city end seemed to go to the boundary in front of the player's race, even if was a two-on-two, and the breakdown of clearances from the back flank felt like it was evenly split between the Swans, Hawthorn and a boundary throw in. There was at least one Hawthorn goal resulting from one of those clearances. In the last quarter and even longer, both teams played a spare man in defence. LRT got a few impressive marks but he was often that spare man. It was a very defensive mindset. Sydney's game plan seemed to depend on getting the breakaway goal, as evident from Jack's and Goodes' goals in the last quarter. This defensive game might not be pretty but it obviously can win you a GF. The points about Watts versus Nic Nat are a bit different. If you go back to November 2008, I strongly suspect that BP and Bails went for the prospect they expected would become a gun FF rather than a potentially mercurial ruckman. In the passage of time, I would say that Jack will become a very good player with great skills who is great in traffic but I think that the forward line is his least likely destination. If Nic can pick up his disposal efficiency, he will become one of the top 3 players of this decade, comparable to Ablett and Judd. It is what it is and Jackie is still one of the favourites in our house.

Interesting topic and very relevant for me as I have two boys aged 8 and 6. In the period from March to now, they have gone from no interest to being avid Dees who wear their Demons jumper to school on most days. The low point was attending the Family Day at Luna Park in March. I persuaded the 8 year-old to come purely on the back of going on the rides. He came away furious as the Haunted Railway was closed, perhaps the only ride closed and the only one that he really wanted to go. I introduced him to Jarred Rivers, Cam Schwab and offered to introduce him to other players but that had no appeal at all. What was supposed to be a great father-son bonding turned into a source of tension. Prior to this year, my boys have been members but had very little interest in Melbourne. They occasionally came to games but were usually board and restless by half time and I had to bribe them to stay with chips and ice cream. They occasionally flirted with following other teams: Hawthorn in 2008 because they were a "happy team"; Norf around 2009 because kangaroos are cute; and Collingwood last year because they were top of the ladder. I took the course of giving them no attention at all in the hope that they would move on. I did joke that the only games that they would see of these teams would be the games against Melbourne. Fortunately, none of that flirting amounted to anything. The turnaround in April of this year was the footy cards that went through their school like wildfire. I shudder to think how much they spent on the cards but trading almost became an obsession in their peer group. My boys major goal was to collect all of the Melbourne cards in each of the tiers. It got to the point where my 8 year-old wanted to spend $38 of his birthday-present-from-grandad on the exclusive Jack Watts card on eBay, but we managed to distract him for long enough on this. One appeal of the cards is the star rating, out of three, for each of the players on the cards based on kicking, marking and handball. Poor Issy is the butt of so many jokes as he has zero stars in each category purely on the back of not playing AFL in 2011. My boys are quite adamant that they are better kicks and marks than poor Issy. As I said, my boys now wear their Demons jumpers most days to school where Collingwood supporters dominate. Somehow, they are philosophical about Melbourne's poor performance. Their attitude is that we will only get better while the teams at the top are bound to descend. They also make the most of all of our victories, so the Essendon, GWS and GC games' replays are frequently watched. In summary, I would say that the lure for them has been the pleasure in trading cards and the engagement with their dad. Oops. I forgot to mention another key dynamic in my boys' new-found love for footy and the Demons. They have started to get to know the players and bits of their histories. For example, they are fascinated with Mitch Clark's journey to Melbourne. Another thing is that they love seeing who their mum likes; they will show her 10 cards and ask which one she would marry if she could marry any of them. From this, they have learnt that my wife isn't turned on by tattoos, for instance. This then led them into understanding what attributes counter the off-putting attributes like tattoos (cue Nathan Jones). Jack Watts is an absolute favourite in our house as he has such an approachable, happy face and features in the top tier of footy cards. Ellie McKenzie's "Getting to Know" clips have been a so valuable. It has been a fun journey for all of us.

Aw... shucks... I had a feeling I'd get a response like yours. My first wish is always to see Melbourne in front on the scoreboard. My second wish is to see both teams play good footy and the red and blue team still prevailing.

I reckon that such a thread will extend to at least 20 pages and dominate the home page for 3 weeks thanks to 4 or 5 posters who keep it ticking over. On the other hand, feel-good threads will start and then disappear off the home page within half a day. Please don't start another negative thread; things are almost never as bad as they seem. Why is it easier to fear the worst and jump at shadows than to carry on optimistically and give ourselves every chance of success? Go Dees. I'm looking forward to seeing some Gary Ablett magic tomorrow but also to seeing Melbourne players show skills, strength and determination that we were hoping for while on our way to a comfortable victory.

My 8yo has gone from having little interest in footy to being a massive Dees fan in 3 months despite the form that we have shown. His favourite players are Mitch and Nathan, and he asked this question when he saw this morning's newspaper. It made me laugh so I though I'd share it with you guys on Demonland.

Last Monday, I sat close to the boundary for the first time this year - normally I like to sit higher to get a better feel for the structures and ball movement. What really struck me this time was how physical the game has become. I love how hard our boys go in and I really think that the Pies' players were intimidated in the 3rd quarter. But in the back of my mind, particularly seeing Jack Grimes head-first dive for the ball, I was wondering if there is an acceptable limit to the physicality for the players sake and ultimately for the health of Aussie Rules. For those who did not arrive early to Monday's game, the scoreboard showed a replay of the last quarter of a Dees / Collingwood match at Victoria Park in 1992. The replay started with Melbourne down by 15 points or so but we clawed them back to win by 9 points (or so) with a goal right on the siren. It was great to reminisce with Jackovic, Lyon, Matt Febey, Chopper, Ox playing the swing-man (though he wasn't the Ox back then), Sean Charles (though I didn't see him with a possession - what wasted opportunity for the MFC). What struck me watching the 1992 game was how different the holding-the-ball / dropping-the-ball interpretation was back then. These days, players take a risk in going for the ball and rely on fumbling if they get tackled, which leads to packs and the physicality that we now see. Back in 1992, the umpires were much more inclined to penalise a player if they grabbed the ball in traffic and got caught. The outcome was a more free flowing game and presumably fewer head-clashes. What do other Demonlanders think about the current holding-the-ball interpretation? Does it lead to more stoppages, congestion and imperil player safety? Should the rules committee allow players to go for the ball even when the chance of getting the ball out seems small? By the way, for the life of me, I could not recall Melbourne's #10 ruckman in 1992 - I think his name was Mahoney. He seemed to do a decent job against Monkhurst and I was wondering what happened to him.

Just because some could wonder whether the monkey is referring to the NMFC site moderator or Majak himself. Congrats to caddypgt for posting the story about Majak's relayed tweet but the monkey image is the dangerous part.

Amazingly un-PC and un-AFL tweek from Majak. Not sure about the chimp at the keyboard image though - dangerous territory.

This is an amazing topic seeing that I had my worst experience at the football on Friday night in 36 years of going to the football. The most amazing thing was that my incident took place in reserved seating on level 3 of the MCC reserve, just in front of the Frank Grey-Smith bar. It was the first time in a few years that I've sat there and was looking forward to getting the higher perspective on structures and ball movement. The 60-something pest just behind me started getting under my skin in the first quarter when he mocked me and my mates' calls for holding the ball in the wing which the umpire awarded to Hawthorn as a high tackle. I bit back by suggesting that the Hawthorn player would be more at home as an Eagle than a Hawk with evasive moves like that. When Hawthorn started getting on top in the second quarter, he ramped up the mocking of Melbourne players and supporters. For the players as an example, he suggested that we add a $100k or drop a $100k for every mark or dropped mark taken by big Mitch. His mocking of the Melbourne supporters as a constant "go dees" in a childish voice and suggestions that the Dee supports rack off to the snow or the bar. I eventually took the bait, turned around and hoped that he would have a lovely day on on Sunday. When he asked why, I told him that he was like a nagging mother-in-law! (I apologise to all the mums and mothers-in-law - comparing this pest to you was grossly unfair, but I was referring to the nasty stereotype). He started blathering on so I yelled over the top of him "nag-nag-nag". As you can tell, I was almost out of control by now. He then suggested that I rack off to the snow or the bar, so I pointed out that I stayed true, I was still here at the football. When he suggested that I was a toff, I accused him of being a Scotchie. This seemed to take him aback but I strongly link Hawthorn to Scotch College. (I'm not sure he understood the insult that I was paying out as I'm an ex-Grammar boy and was sitting with a couple of ex-Xavs). Before long, the half-time siren blew and me and my mates retired to the bar for some refreshments. In the third quarter, he started up again but it felt easy to me to ignore him and it was my mates who bit back. Thankfully, he was gone by 3/4 time. In hindsight, he was being a pest and his verbal stouches were absolutely anti-social. Unlike others in some other threads on Demonland, I believe that there are boundaries on acceptable barracking at the football, and this guy definitely crossed that boundary when he started mocking Melbourne supporters and clearly directing it toward me and my mates. He did drop the occassional f-bomb which contravenes MCC rules, but not quite enough for me to alert the attendents at the time. My wife suggested that I could have moved, but reserved seats on level-3 are hard to get and I felt that he was in the wrong. In hindsight, he was a pest who wanted to get under my skin and I let him succeed 100%. I wish that I had just told him, at least in my own mind, that he was being a pest and left it at that. And maybe, I wish that I had reported his swearing to the attendents so that he would have got a message about boundaries on acceptable barracking.

I'm only in my mid-forties, but I'm about to sound like my father-in-law and come out with "In my day...". When I was learning footy as a schoolboy, we were taught to paddle the ball along the ground in front of us is there was a threat to getting tackled. If you picked up the ball and was then tackled - a free kick against you. The beauty of this was that it kept the ball flowing - none of this picking up the ball knowing that you'll get tackled just so that you end up with a stoppage. I'm not sure when the interpretation changed but I think that it is a turn for the worse. I think that players should be penalised if they dive on the ball and get tackled. Second rate players may "lurk", but really good players become skilled at attacking the ball and keeping it moving at the same time. That was one of the things that I have noticed every time we have played Geelong since 2007. One of my wishes for the rules is that players are responsible if they grab the ball and get tackled. If we bring in this interpretation, we'll see more players knocking the ball on in contested situations and fewer stoppages.

I was moved in reading Martin Flanagan's pieces yesterday and today; Martin is a favourite of mine and his columns are almost "must read" status for me. I was even more moved by Gerard Whateley's piece posted on the ABC's The Drum website yesterday: ... he didn't like many people but he loved Jim. I've read this about 3 times and I still choke big-time when I read the line: "His motives touched at the core of why football matters so much. He wanted his son to one day come to the MCG with his son to barrack for the mighty Dees." Gerard is my favourite radio caller but after I read this piece, he seems destined for the press as well.

Footy is such a drug that demands my attention even when I resolve to be a little more balanced. I think that I’ve attended every MCG game in the past 3 years bar 2 (both of them were wins as well), and I’ve read, aborbed and enjoyed all of the training reports on Demonland and ‘Ology, despite them seeming to be pretty consistent. Last Monday, I took advantage of the 8am start to training at the Gosch to watch my first training session since the boys trained in the twilight at Junction Oval in 1992 (I was working in the “cheese grater” next door back in 92). Watching training on Monday morning met many of my expectations based on the fabulous training reports, but there were some quirks that took me a little by surprise. I’ve really enjoyed the training reports, but I thought that I’d share some of my observations that I did not see in others’ reports. My first observation was how smooth and gradual the warm-up was. From memory, it consisted of the following: Players arriving at the oval took a gentle walk in groups of 2 to 5 for one lap around the boundary. The coach who led the warm-up said a few words that I could not hear, then I heard him call out “do a single”, which obviously translated to jog a single lap. There was an array of stretching exercises for the legs and groin. As an ex-amateur player (from the mid-80s to the early 90s), their stretches looked really well thought out. There were a series of kicking exercises where players would start in two rows, 15 metres apart at first moving out to 30 metres, kicking one-on-one to each other. By the time I thought to look, they were tending to kick with their non-preferred foot. I remember Robbie Flower’s dead-eye aim in the 70’s World of Sport handball competition, and these guys looked more like amateurs than Robbie Flower. (Readers, please don’t get worried by this – I saw this as merely a part of the warm-up routine.) The players then did some good-old circle work, though with stations positioned on each of the flanks and in the goal squares. I moved into the boundary to watch closely how well each of the players were handling and disposing of the ball. By this time, the players were pretty much moving at full pace. I also realised after 5 or so minutes of this that I was so absorbed that I had almost forgotten to breathe – I love footy so much. Flowing footy is like poetry in motion for me and completely absorbs me. As far as skills were concerned, I’d say that about half of the disposal / accuracy / receiving was clean enough to withstand a defender one metre behind and hot on the tail of the target. At the end of the circle work, the players did something that I’ve never seen in Aussie Rules but it is a feature of sports like Rugby Union and hockey. The players formed two rows facing each other like a sausage and rotated around the group and “congratulated” each of their team mates with a hand-shake, should pat sort of thing. As a Dees fan, it looked good. A trainer then brought out a bag of GPS harnesses and the players stripped off their red shirts to put the harness on and to don one of the white or royal blue jumpers that others have described in their reports. There was a few minutes break while a steady stream of players almost sprinted to the heritage green public lavatory on the corner of the park next to the entrance to AAMI Park. Seeing the players resort to using the public toilet struck me as a bit odd; a bit inconsistent with being elite sportsmen and trainers. I won’t say who was first to do a whiz, but that was only 20 minutes after they started. I’m sure that they drink buckets of water but I’d be surprised if someone attending a training session at my work excused themselves 20 minutes after the training started. At first, I thought that this was an aberration until there were about another 5 players who did the same thing in the next 5 minutes. After the short break, the players moved into the match simulation with directions from Choco in the middle. Boy it felt weird watching a match simulation on the boundary line rather than up in the stands as I found it really hard to process any of what was happening. Most of the players were hard to distinguish and, frankly, it looked pretty scrappy. It did not help that most of the action was taking place on the opposite wing. One thing that interested me was that they operated an interchange bench, with Tappy and Willow interchanging and even with an official with a whiteboard. I could almost imagine one of those umpires with the tight trackies making sure that the Post-it notes were in order. At the end of about 10 minutes of match-simulation, they called a break. By this time, it was 9:15 or so and I had to head off to work. Some other observations. Neeldy and most of the other senior coaches spent quite a bit of time standing around chewing the fat with their arms crossed, hands in their pockets or pulling up their shorts. (Those shorts aren’t the sort of clothes you’d see the Fonz wear on Happy Days, if you know what I mean.) It struck me how different their work environment was to my work environment, where appearing as though you are loafing is seriously frowned upon. These guys get paid mega-bucks and obviously know when to sit on the perimeter and observe, and when to step in, absorb the pressure and make some big calls. I sensed that Neeldy was very comfortable with empowering his assistants. Immensely talented players who can do freakish things in a game blended in at this training session (at least for the 45 minutes of training that I watched). Guys like Killer, Greeny, Rush, Chipper didn’t stand out like what I’ve come to expect. I’ll finish up by stating that I think that they guys will be really competitive this season. I went to AGM (and even asked a question), and I had the distinct impression that the top-brass are conspiring to keep a lid on expectations, a la the “under-promise and over-deliver” mantra. The vibe at training was quiet but positive, along the lines of follow the process and the outcomes will look after themselves. The match simulation may have been scrappy but I got a real sense of steely determination. I’m not supposed to go to so many games this year as I’m starting a part-time Masters degree, but I sense that I’ll be down at the G more time than I plan for. Go Dees!

The members information night had a number of great presentations, but the one that caught my attention most was Bails. After the first line, I was wondering if I was sitting in the MCC Dining Room or in the change rooms in preparation for the Queens Birthday clash; Bails is a great orator and rivals anyone else I've heard. As a MFC lover and footy fanatic, I often wonder how to predict whether one team will score more than another team. Teams need players who can change momentum with courage and skill, a game plan to suit the relative strengths of its individuals, and a coach who can inspire players to bust their gut more than opponents. I struggle to pick a game plan and whether one is better than the other, but boy-oh-boy Bails does a great gee-up job.