binman

Are you related per chance?

It's unbelievable. Based on those highlights there is no doubt all of our new players are guns. Taylor is a genius. Who needs first round draft picks!

This is from AFL draft central write up on Sparrow posted above: 'He has clear deficiencies in the game with regards to his disposal by foot and decision making, which is what has him slipping in the draft to a late draft selection or rookie selection.' I have to say i got their selection focus completely wrong. I was sure they would have an emphasis on skill and outside players. I mean how many hard ball , contested beast with iffy disposal skills do we need? I'm not knocking the decsion - i have complete faith in our footy club ATM, which is great. Maybe we will have a Spargo and a Sparrow crumbing in our forward line in the not too distant future.

High noon

Wrong on 2 of 3 counts OD (pardon the pun). Well more accurate to say wrong on the second and i disagree with the first I think the project will happen. Labor will win this election easily and will not have to rely on the Greens to form government. Odds are not everything - and really they simply reflect polling - but currently labor are 1.14 to win the election. That is seriously short. Shorter than Winx. For context they were 1.70 two weeks ago, and 1.20 yesterday. But the more interesting market is for the likelihood of a majority government being formed. Two weeks ago it was basically even money. it is now 1.40. This is a refection of the fact The Greens have had a horror two weeks. Could not have been worse for them. And for those dismissing the odds as meaningless, i'd say two things. Seriously big money is now bet on elections. And there is very little emotion involved. Secondly whilst polling has been been sketchy in recent times i think that might be a blip and are likely to be pretty accurate this year - particularly with so many votes having already been cast.

I don't understand why posters are suggesting the proposal is dead and buried simply because labor have said they won't 'support' the proposal. This statement is meaningless. A clever clogs way of not risking any votes in marginal electorates. Firstly, i might be wrong, but it is my understanding the CoM has planning authority for yarra park, not the State government. I assume the state gov could somehow take control in the way they have with fishermen's bend but why would they? Secondly, and of most significance, positions change and if lying is the first language of footy, well then it is the only language of politics. I mean please would anyone seriously be surprised if a government (of any persuasion) made such statement and then did the opposite, particularly a wishy washy statement statement such as 'not support' (as opposed to a more definitive - 'we will ensure it does no proceed' - which would still not rule out a change of heart). There are any number of examples, but a topical one is the safe injecting rooms in Richmond. Labor unequivocally opposed them prior to the last election and hey presto 3 years later opens one and starts building a proper facility. Thankfully i might add. And by the by what a peanut Guy is for saying he will close it in his first week if elected - despite its evident success in reducing fatal and non fatal overdoses and demand on paramedics and ambos. What sort of policy decision is that? Peanut

My understating it can be chromecast and apple played (is that a thing) and there is no contract. Similar to Netflix and Spotify. Whose model no doubt depends on people simply not ever bothering to stop it. it is tempting for the footy i have to say, in so far as i usually go to the pub to watch interstate games that are not on free to air and if you add together pub priced drinks, the occasional bet on the pub tab and perhaps a meal, i'm not getting much change from $70.

Lucky O-ring

excellent show fellas. Terrific interview with Josh with some really good questions and thoughtful respones and i enjoyed It's Time's contribution. He's an impressive fella, JM - we're lucky to have him. I liked the neat way he sidestepped the question from Grapeviney asking if he had his hat in the ring for the CEO gig. One question came to mind during the interview. i would be interested in knowing what the sense the club (and by the club i don't mean players) has of Demonland (and Bigfooty - to a lesser extent), in so far as they have ready access to the sort of feedback and opinion of hardcore fans that most business would kill for - and often pay for in terms of expensive focus groups and consultation processes.

Forgot all about it! Good show?

Yep. Top 4 is pass mark. That said a lot has to go right and not much wrong to achieve it.

Strange isn't it. When we secured lever some on here said that would mean omac going to Casey for his "development' having been 'gifted' games in 2017. What happens? Plays almost every minute of every game in 2018. Including the 8 -9 lever played in. Having played all b as r one the previous season. And frost. Only got a run at it once lever went down and only after he had worked on his weaknesses. Omac is well ahead of frost.

Im a bit worried i might have got the track wrong. its been upgraded to a good 3 and the wind has got up and so there is bit of headwind in the home straight. Both factors suit on speed horses with a bit of cover, but he win will make it hard for leaders, Funny actually because i almost always favour on pacers. My one exception today - ie i mainly selected run on horses - is Thinking Big as i figured he is the best stayer. Conditions will help him now

Oh Damn. Lets go with Thinking Big in the derby

My best is Osborne bulls. Race 3 no 1. Its run on rubbish ground in the Everest was huge (cost me the trif - which I thought I had from the vision). Redzel form is primo and ob is a winner. Also suspect track will suit run on horses. Which I hope is right as I have made my selections based on that.

Of course the TV networks have some pull. Like der. I never said they didn't. That pull can be seen this year. 7 would have made it crystal clear they wanted good, evenly matched top teams scheduled in the marquee slots. And no carlton. But having some pull is a long way from the control you have previously suggested on multiple occasions (but seem now to be walking back from) tm7 and fox have.

Got it wrong? Are you still seriously suggesting channel 7 advocated for blues to get Friday night games? Not a single person in the world would have expected them to be competitive last year. Even if you knew zero about football all you would need to do is look at their record and points for and against for the preceding decade to know that. But you think a station that has been covering football for 40 odd years got it wrong. And the television era? Please.

What the? You maintained Channel 7 controls the scheduling and used that power to ensure the blues got multiple Friday night games, because of the old boys club , them being power club, the 70s and 80s yada yada. I said that was ridiculous as they are a commercial operation, answerable to their shareholders, interested in ratings and profits and if they had the power you have maintained they do they certainly wouldn't use it to have Friday night games that no one watches. Passing on memos?. What memos? memos from Channel 7 to the AFL telling them to schedule the blues on Friday nights? Please refresh my memory.

I do too. I assume they have done the maths. Have we singed up for two beyond this year? The issue isn't really financial as we are compensated obviously. The issue is does giving up home ground advantage make it harder to win games (ie the 2 NT games and the ones after because of the travel, heat and humidity)? Last year we won both NT games, flogging the crows in a massive performance that really got us rolling. And am i right in thinking we won the next game both times? If we repeat last year's performance then you have to say we have done ok from the deal, particularly if the heart of the country game in the Alice gets similar exposure again. But given we play two top teams, who we most certainly would have a better chance of beating at home, winning both is pretty unlikely

SYWL what's your explanation for carlton not getting a single Friday night game? Perhaps the AFL didn't get channel 7's memo telling them that carlton HAD to be scheduled for multiple Friday night games because they are a power club and channel 7 is interested only in seeing them rise up the ladder. Or maybe they did and realised it was dated 4 October 1979.

We don't 'agree" to play two home games in the NT.. We choose to.

Very tough last 5 games though. But an advantage of playing other contenders is winning against teams competing for top 8 ladder position, and potentially top 4. Lots of 8 point games!

Deservedly tough draw. We are a top 4 side. Other teams will not look forward to playing us. Huge from a financial perspective and brilliant for sponsors. Some huge games against big Victorian clubs will make for some terrific games and big game atmosphere. 13 FTA is massive as is the fact we gte get six stand alone FTA games (3 Friday nights, a Thursday night, the ANZAC eve game and QB). That's a brilliant result.

We'll i don't think that is true this year. We will get FTA exposure for this game and it is one that is likely to rate well, particularly given the thriller last year down there (how many times will we see 2EES goal in the pre game coverage? And by the sounds of the orchestrate leak we will get plenty of plumb FTA night games this year. Lets see on that front but given where we have come from in terms of coverage i would suggest we are winning the battle for exposure.

That's frustrating we have to play them there. Means I likely won't go. We better get a second game at the g (I'm sure we will). The upside is that game will FTA