Slartibartfast

This is an interesting post in that it probably identifies why I like her and many here don't. What we learned from the article you've identified was that there was a meeting of members of the football department where Connolly addressed the importance of losing and pressed for us to tank (joke or not). That was the core piece of information and to my knowledge was the first time it became public, It was central to the penalty that was finally handed down and it lead to the downfall of Connolly, Schwab and McLardy. To me that was an insightful and very interesting article, a must read for those interested in the tanking investigation. I didn't like it but that's not the point. The big picture was right and that is what interests me. You,amongst other things, didn't like that she either knowingly or unknowingly said the meeting was believed to be code named "the vault" when in fact "the vault" was the venue of the meeting and not the name of the meeting. IMO this error is of no substance. It doesn't change the primary information. It had no bearing on outcome or issues. But you like picking up on these errors because you have some pedantry characteristics. That's not meant as a negative but merely recognizing things as they are. I dislike pedantry because it blurs the main issues and alters focus. I like big picture, you like detail. CW gave us the information ahead of anyone else. She was right about most things. Her editorial was very negative because she believes the game is lessened in an environment where clubs try to lose and she expressed her view strongly. I can live with that. I really like that on the big issues she is usually first and is usually right. That she bungles a few minor facts and uses emotive language bothers me not a dot. I must say it was rather funny reading Demonland as she was ripping into James Hird and some peoples attempts to reconcile her unreasonable treatment of us and her pursuit of Hird. She'll also get it wrong now and again. So what. She's the first footy journalist I read.

Well done Binman and Deeko, two differing points of view well presented. Thanks.

Now that's negative.

No, he doesn't need to put in a blinder, he needs to show he can be a regular part of the senior team going forward.

I'll stop reading her when she watches games and reports on them. But each to their own.

I reckon that comment about 16 year old girls is offensive. Given the rest of your post it is rather hypocritical too! I'd also suggest that the vast majority of Caroline Wilson's stuff is spot on and good journalism. I know many here don't like her because she reported on the tanking fiasco but she was front and centre with what was happening and a reliable source. That we didn't like her opinion is neither here or there. Her piece in this mornings Age is a good read and very informative and she often provides information and insights others don't. I also reckon that people should toughen up and stop taking offence at every little dig at us. You reap what you sow and until we perform I can hardly blame journo's for painting us in a poor light.

This makes more sense than most things I read on Demonland!

Nothing. Would you go? The club should have a range of way to raise revenue from the supporter base and then we have the freedom of choice. It's not "tacky" or tasteless. It's an option to the supporter base.

I don't think I've ever read such rot on Demonland. This idea is as old as the hills and was part and parcel of the usual fund raising for years. TBH I didn't realise it had been dropped. It's pretty simple really. The Club is merely offering those that want to a chance to contribute. If you don't like it don't do it. But getting offended by it is dumb. Everyone supports in the way that suits them. There is no obligation, we are not paying taxes, there is no penalty for not participating so if you don't like it just ignore it. But all this rot? Give me a break.

I agree but why does it have to be either/or? It could so easily be "both". If 5 people make the decision not to go because it clashes with the opening night that $1,000 lost. After all, I could stay at home, save $200, watch the opening game of the season and then go to the website and most likely see all the presentations by the coaches/players anyway. I'm going but I don't understand the scheduling.

If that's your solution I hope you're not in a management or decision making environment.

Quite so if your only interest in footy is MFC but mine goes a lot further and I find the first game of an AFL season very enjoyable. It's when the real stuff starts and marks the spot in time we've been waiting for all preseason. Watching a replay is of little value when you in all likelihood the result will be known. To organize this function on this night when so many other nights would have been available seems odd to me and rather poor planning.

Seems a very strange night to hold the commencement dinner. Didn't they look at the fixture - it clashes with the first match of the season.

Makes list management a challenge.

Martin and Bennell.

Just as a point of interest did any experienced player extend his contract under Neeld's reign?

I'm thinking King could well play KP before his career is out.

The game was played in blustery conditions but I thought the skill standard was pretty good. Having said that the tempo of the game was nowhere near AFL level. I had two major observations from the game. The first is that Jack Watts looked an absolute natural in the midfield and had a lot of the ball and used it very well. He has time in the same way Travis had time. I'm not making any further comparisons but will be interested to see how he develops. It's ironic that he was drafted as a KP forward which is what we really needed at the time but may well turn out into a quality mid which is exactly what we need. The other observation is that Jack Fitzpatrick will be very difficult to keep out of the team. His leading and marking was good and I thought he was the most impressive of the tall forwards. How we deal with the talls in the forward line will be one of the more interesting things to see this year. On Salem I wouldn't get too excited about a debut early. He played little cameos that were full of class and might earn him a practice game. But I think Roos will ease him in and I'd expect blokes like Toumpas, Viney, Kent, JKH and Salem to all spend some time at Casey.

Do you feel honoured WJ?

Thanks for all the advice everyone and particularly T-34 (unless of course you're pulling my leg!). K9 and I will most likely attend. Particular thanks to Redleg for showing I'm only the 2nd worse comedian on DL. Shute, didn't realize it was at Goschs! Thanks T-34.

Look without wanting to make a mountain out of a mole hill if I ignore the thread it doesn't correct the issue of someone making public a private conversation to the detriment of Jack Watts and the MFC. I think it's wrong that the thread should exist so therefore ignoring it doesn't solve the problem.

Okay, here's one from left field. I went to attend the Port Melbourne v Casey practice match last year with dog in tow and was denied entry to the ground by some officious security person. Does anyone know if you can take dogs to the practice match on Thursday? *slinks off waiting for a barrage of jokes.....*

This isn't a view, it's a breach of trust revealing the content of a private conversation. Anyway each to their own, it appears Demonland agrees with you.

I think Demonland should delete the thread.

The difference of course is that the players get one chance at a career. Ask Taggart and Tynan. The biggest disappointment is that a conversation that was never invented for the public domain has ended up in one. Not only that but the player has been named. It's good fodder for us but it shouldn't be here. Disappointing disclosure SD.