Inner Demon

Perfect change.

Suggestions Newton played well last week are an appropriately stinging indictment on how rubbish he really is.

I agree we need a key forward who can be a target and create a contest, but I don't see what that's got to do with Michael Newton.

Yes.

It makes no commercial sense.

Brendan Fevola.

Is there a more complete bogan??

Again confused.

When you see the MELBOURNE icon stamped across the sporting events you mention, it is NOT a sponsorship from the City of Melbourne. It is Victorian State Government.

I'm not sure how to be clearer on this. Municipal councils do not have the budget for sponsorships. They are not concerned with tourism. They are not relevant in conversations regarding spending money on sport.

The Melbourne City Council has absolutely nothing to do with Tullamarine Airport.

Hawthorn are not sponsored by a city council, they are sponsored by the Tasmanian State Government who are looking to attract people living in Melbourne (Hawthorn supporters and supporters of their opposition in the Tasmanian games they are paying to host) to come to Tasmania.

There are no commonalities between Tasmania sponsoring Hawthorn and the idea of Melbourne City Council sponsoring MFC.

Wow.

Just have to smash this rabble.

EDIT: Oh, and Juice out, surely.

He maybe ready for China in October

You seem convinced the club is preparing a squad for this post-season exhibition match.

They're not.

Does anyone know what's going on with Sam Blease? Haven't seen any info about him running around for the Scorps.

Sam was set to play his first game for Casey Reserves on the weekend but was struck down with a virus so missed out. Hopefully he's feeling better for this weekend.

The good news is his leg is good to go.

There's no hurry on Gawn. He's a massive, massive kid who is apparently still growing a bit. We need him for the next 10-12 years more than we need him for the next 10-12 weeks. Comebacks from ACLs are always fraught with danger and I'm really glad we're giving him an extended lay-off.

The 12 month rule that we usually see doesn't really apply to Max either. That usually applies to players who have been in the system and have a fitness base prior to the injury. Max missed the 2nd half of last year and the entire pre-season. Once he reaches the end of his 12 month rehab in July he'd then likely enter 'pre-season' mode. If he gets in a few games for Casey Reserves at the end of the year, great, if not, I won't lose a minute's sleep. I'm more interested in him being 100% to commence his first full-preseason next year.

That's an incredibly simplistic view of sponsorship.

Awareness is part of what an emerging brand whose product lacks awareness is paying for. Kaspersky is a good example of this. It's a new brand in this market and the public isn't familiar with the name.

However, when a brand is already widely known, awareness will not be their objective. Tasmania (Haw) & Ford (Geel) are not trying to raise their awareness, their awareness figures are already maximised. They are paying to attract actual business. Tasmania wants to attract visitors, which it achieves mostly via paying Hawthorn to host games in the state. Ford wants to sell cars.

City of Melbourne does not have a product to sell that can be leveraged through MFC. They can't pay us to play games in Melbourne. Melbourne City Council does not advertise to bring tourism to Melbourne, that is the Victorian State Government's domain. I realise that MFC supporters would get a warm and fuzzy from seeing our emblem somehow associated with City of Melbourne, but it achieves no objective whatsoever and follows no commercial logic from the sponsor's point of view.

Wonanewhami???

That's very clever.

Well done.

2 new Interstate Teams starting next year means a lot more potential visitors to the city each weekend for 6 months of the year.

Maybe it is a good time to word up old Robert Doyle-he enjoys the Free lunch!

So what's this got to do with sponsoring MFC??

City of Melbourne is a municipal council which oversees a clutch of suburbs around the CBD. It doesn't have a direct interest in tourism or revenue coming into the State. This is in contrast to the Tasmanian State Government.

That said, MFC has certain involvements with City of Melbourne just as it does with City of Casey. These are not considered sponsorships as such however as money is not changing hands.

Just to return briefly to the oft-mentioned idea of the airport billboard. Advertising space of this nature has no link to City of Melbourne. It lies outside of their municipality and besides billboard space is owned by outdoor advertising firms, not by city councils.

Sponsors are in it for a return on their investment.

City of Melbourne doesn't have a product to sell by promoting their brand.

What's in it for City of Melbourne??

A long time ago, and a totally different game nowadays, but Melbourne's golden era in the 1950s and 60's was built around a forward structure containing decoy full forwards, and rovers, flankers and pocket players who all kicked goals.

There is the key part of your post that sees Newton thrown on the scrap heap.

As for decoy leads, they are still very much a part of the modern game. Every player in a forward line will be used for decoy leads throughout a game. Really, when you think about it, all genuine leads that aren't honoured but open up space for the next lead ,which is honoured, are, in effect, decoy leads. A decoy lead doesn't mean that player is just going to run off randomly to an area the ball will never be delivered and he doesn't expect to win the ball. It just means that players don't all lead to the one area and crowd each other/bring their opponents into the contest.

The assertion that anyone here claimed to know better than those who spend every day with the players is laughable.

We're all sitting here debating selection issues based on what we saw out on the field on the weekend and our own perceptions. You are very quick to jump on people's opinions Inner and ridicule them without any counter argument. Maybe just allow us to debate and throw around ideas and you in turn can post your own rebuttals.

We as supporters are allowed to have opinions about selection issues. Do you declare unequivocally that team selection is NEVER wrong or never to be criticized because we couldn't possibly know as much as the selectors do? I'm sure selectors often regret decisions with the benefit of hindsight. Is it not conceivable that those at the club felt Garland was ready, for example, and then maybe had a re-think after his performance in the game? Have you ever seen a player come back too early and re-injure himself? Did the club who risked the player 'know better' at that stage? All decisions such as these are based on educated guesses. The club may be more educated than us in their decision making process, but I don't see how that makes debating the issue here "laughable".

there is no reason why T Mac or Rivers or Cheney could not come in to replace Garland, given he is nowhere near ready for AFL footy at this stage of his recovery (how many practice/Casey games has he actually played??? I think only one full game at Casey and one half game!!! In a whole 12 months!!! Not great preparation!!!)

I have no problem with questioning things or having thoughts/opinions of your own, it's when people declare things to be the case in such emphatic fashion when they have zero real knowledge of the situation that gets me. Our FD is quite consistent on not rushing players in when under injury clouds as we've seen in countless recent scenarios. To boldly declare that they have played someone who is "nowhere near ready for AFL footy at this stage of his recovery" is claiming knowledge you simply do not possess.

Yes, I am quick to jump on these baseless 'statements of fact' because I don't believe they meaningfully contribute to a conversation.

When I read the subject line of the thread I thought it would be "Juice's week to take a contested mark" or "Juice's week to not get pushed away by a bloke half his size".

Then I read that it was Juice's week to kick 6 in an AFL game.

I suppose there's always a place for light-hearted, joke threads every now and then. Very amusing.

The idea that anyone here could claim to know better than those who spend every day with the players on what stage of fitness or game-readiness they are is pretty laughable.

At T-Mac's size being 6 years younger than Warnock and Rivers there is definitely an opportunity for him to work his way into the team over the years. A spot on the list isn't justified only by next weekend's game. Who knows where any of these players might be in 2-3 years time. Players outside of the Top 22 aren't just "depth" players or "project" players. Genuine competition for spots is what makes great teams. It's awesome that we've got young players like Tommy, Kyle, Addam etc performing at VFL level and pushing their case for AFL games. We've already seen these guys show glimpses at the top level and we will see more from them in years to come.

Exciting stuff.

Rivers to Riewoldt. Frawley to Morton. Warnock to Post. Garland to Nason. Bartram to Tambling. Grimes to Cousins.

Doesn't seem that hard.

I didn't realise you could have too many good sized, mobile, courageous, strong marking, excellent play readers in a backline.

Behind Sylvia & Rivers for a start.

6 Frawley

5 Bail

4 Bennell

3 Grimes

2 Jamar

1 McDonald

Fascinating stuff. Really loved hearing all of the various things the players were instructed to focus on and then watching them put them into action, or not as was the case in the 2nd quarter.

Yet another great initiative.

i believe you, you seem to now everything about the AFL,are you trying to say that pathetic side has 40,000 die hards, your in a dream world,maybe you lunch with B gale, distorted numbers.

Well I obviously know more than you. Membership numbers are audited by the AFL and to be included in the published figure the membership category must meet certain criteria such as cost.

$27 pet memberships do not count.