deejammin'

We have to use a pick to upgrade JJ and while it’s not completely confirmed it seems likely we also need to use another pick to upgrade Chandler so if that eventuates we only have to take one more player through the draft. In theory we could use just 17 although it seems more likely there will be more, particularly if we delist Hore and/or Declase.

The problem with this is once you have four A-rookies, rookie A spots 5-6 still prevent you from having main list spots 37-38 so moving him to the rookie list doesn’t necessarily free up a spot. Unless we can Category B rookie him? But I don’t think we can as in my understanding it’s reserved to athletes from other codes. Thats in addition to the draft issue Premiers raises above.

The reason I was given that it’s definitely senior list was that there are limits on one year contracts and salary for rookies and Chandler signed for two years and needed to be offered senior list money to have him stay. Could be wrong but I’m pretty sure it’s a two year deal for senior list. It’s not in the announcement but it is in the Herald Sun and was on trade radio, also getting it second hand from someone who’s usually right about these things.

Hi Premiers, thanks for your fantastic work. I’m hearing that Chandler will be upgraded as part of this signing so I had the following, I seem to have one less main list than you atm, who have I missed?: Main list 34 players: May, Salem, Harmes, Petracca, Jackson, Viney, Lever, Spargo, Brayshaw, Gawn, Bedford, Oliver, Hibberd, Langdon, Laurie, Bowey, Melksham, Rosman, Tomlinson, Jordan, Rivers, TMcDonald, Weideman, Hunt, Neale-Bullen, Fritsch, Sparrow, Baker, Petty, Pickett, Chandler, JSmith, BBrown, Dunstan 35 = Hore??? Rookie A: Daw, DSmith, MBrown, Turner 5= Declase?? So we have between 2-4 main list spots to fill and 0-2 category A rookie spots to fill, we can then take an additional 2 category B rookies regardless to take the list to 44. We have to take at least pick 17 + upgrading JJ and Chandler. If we keep Hore we will take pick 17 and can either draft two more to our main list or a combination of one rookie and one main list. If we keep Hore and Declase as a rookie we will take pick 17 and can draft one more main list or take one more rookie A. If we delist both Hore and Declase we can draft pick 17 + 3 more players either 3 main list or 1 main list 2 rookies A or 2 main list one rookie A. I need a lie down…

If we delist one of Hore or Declase we can take pick 17, Taj and Andy and keep one of Hore or Declase as it stands. Or delist both Hore and Declase and take 17, Taj, Andy and one more player if that eventuates.

Ok so it was driving me mad so I did some work. As it stands we have: Main list 34 players: May, Salem, Harmes, Petracca, Jackson, Viney, Lever, Spargo, Brayshaw, Gawn, Bedford, Oliver, Hibberd, Langdon, Laurie, Bowey, Melksham, Rosman, Tomlinson, Jordan, Rivers, TMcDonald, Weideman, Hunt, Neale-Bullen, Fritsch, Sparrow, Baker, Petty, Pickett, Chandler, JSmith, BBrown, Dunstan 35 = Hore??? Rookie A: Daw, DSmith, MBrown, Turner 5= Declase?? The main list can be up to 36-38 depending on whether you take 4-6 category A rookies. So we have between 2-4 main list spots to fill and 0-2 category A rookie spots to fill, we can then take an additional 2 category B rookies regardless to take the list to 44. We have to take at least pick 17 + upgrading JJ and Chandler. If we keep Hore we will take pick 17 and can either draft two more to our main list or a combination of one rookie and one main list. If we keep Hore and Declase as a rookie we will take pick 17 and can draft one more main list or take one more rookie A. If we delist both Hore and Declase we can draft pick 17 + 3 more players either 3 main list or 1 main list 2 rookies A or 2 main list one rookie A. I need a lie down…

It’s worth noting though because the total list size between your main list and cat A rookies can’t exceed 42 (+ 2 cat B rookies for 44) we can EITHER put two players on our main list or draft one main list and one rookie. We can’t fill all four positions. Just to clarify we currently have 36 on our main list (including Chandler and JJ’s upgrades), we can go to 38. We have four rookies in cat A (MBrown, Daw, Smith, Turner) so we could in theory go to 6, but only if we keep our main list to 36.

Assuming Hibbo has re-signed as reported we have: 2 main list spots, 1 if we recontract Hore 2 A Rookie spots, One if we re-rookie Declase 2 B Rookie spots

I thought Lockhart was mighty stiff. Was best 22 until the [censored] incident in the pre-season against the doggies. I guess with Bowey going past him and Hunt ahead of him all year that’s why he had to go? Is there any chance we use our one free rookie spot to re-rookie Jay? Baker was ordinary against North in his one AFL game this year, but I’ll back our development crew in, he’s behind a few blokes but if he becomes a quality winger it’s still one of the very few areas we’re a bit shallow.

At the moment with JJ and Chandler to be elevated we have 4 A rookies, 5 if we retain Declase. So 1 free main list spot (pick 17 atm) 1 Free A rookie spot, and both our category B rookie spots. So if Hore goes we can draft two players in addition to using two picks to upgrade Chandler and Jordan. It might be an anxious wait for young Marty as it could come down to who Taylor and co think we can get at 37.

Hore is on the main list. Doing some reading on the excellent Demonland list management thread it looks like you’re right. Although there are several reports of Hibbo getting another year, I can’t find the actual announcement. It seems we have Declase as the only rookie not extended, and Hore waiting on his fate. As you say we need to upgrade Chandler and JJ which leaves us with only one pick to use (17) but possibly with Hore going we could draft another (if he’s on the main list?)?

Great result. Happy to see us fight off competition for Chandler and the others can play roles if their development continues and they are needed. Melbourne has re-signed seven players ahead of the 2022 season So does that just leave Declase unsigned? With Jones, Vanders, Jetta and Lockhart off the main list and Nietsche and Bradke off the rookies we will use 3 draft picks at this stage with Dunstan coming in and potentially two rookies? Is that right?

One of the unexpected joys of the great many joys of this premiership has been laughing at these so called “experts” back-track on their Melbourne-hate laden commentary. Buckenara has been one, he hates the Dees, he’s been pathetic in his analysis of our lists over many years, his failure to rate Trac, Lever, May and Oliver for starters. Like many in the AFL media he hates us and has traded on the ‘Melbourne will inevitably fail’ narrative that has pervaded all commentary on our Dees. I think we all know why this exists, and in the past it’s been deserved but it has genuinely prevented a lot of football minds from viewing us objectively. I’ve been going back through watching all our games this year (I mean, why wouldn’t you?!) and it’s really interesting listening to the commentary and thinking back on all the experts this year, Whately, Derwayne Russell, David King, that [censored] BT, Jimmy Bartel, they all refused to believe Melbourne was capable of anything even when we were 11-1. Listening to the commentary of BT screaming “I just don’t believe they’re good” when we’re 30+ points up on Carlton in round 9 is particularly funny now. Even in the second half of the season there was this begrudging acknowledgment that Melbourne was good but a constant narrative that others were better and we would fall down when it counted. Ahhhh the schaudenfreuder! For me the biggest [censored] of all is Matt Rendell, I listen to draft radio as I love footy but why does anyone listen to a word this guy says? Picked 3 of the top 8 this year, had the premiers 15th losing our coach in the first half of our season and in the greatest [censored] move of all still had us unable to win the premiership with a list that’s not good enough in round 17!!! Check this out: https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/07/28/the-biggest-worry-for-melbourne-right-now/ Also just last week the genius Rendell declared Max Gawn had “done his job” as captain and was one of 16 captains who could lose the role next year. Also didn’t have him in the top 3 captains in the AFL. The Melbourne hate lives on in surreptitious ways. Bring it on! Let’s prove him wrong again! MATT RENDELL = [censored]

Great win, clinical, super consistent, better all over the ground. As much as I hate the channel 7 commentary team it was hilarious listening to BT trying to justify his love for the dogs tonight, my favourite was when he said ‘this will make it tough for the dogs’ when we went 41 points up with 14 minutes left, ahhhh yeah we’re double their score mate! Flat track bulldogs, sorry I mean bullies anyone? We’re 5-0 against the top 9, Dogs are 3-2. Pretenders. Go Dees! The one downer is the loss of Langdon, massive out, any chance Viney gets up ??????

The way this commentary team talks about the bulldogs you’d think they were five goals up! Not getting totally outplayed and down by 4 goals. Anytime we get down in a game the commentary team go on about “trouble for the Dees etc” dogs get pantsed and they still talk like Carlton should be worried. Hilarious.

Yeah I agree on Melksham which is why I think he stays in, he adds a midfield rotation which is valuable. But he was close to our worst, particularly in the first half this week so if he keeps that up I think another small forward might be more value? Petty’s second half was good against Hawthorn, but his first half wasn’t AFL standard. Tom has been in great form all year and I think a lot of his deficiencies from when he used to play back have improved. I’m nervous about Petty. Hopefully he plays a blinder and the three tall forwards rip it up and smash the swans. I just hope match committee aren’t being too stubborn re Tom back. One other little thing is that when Jacko goes in the ruck and Gawn rests forward the Gawn/Brown forward fifty looks a lot less mobile and provides a lot less pressure than the Gawn/McDonald forwardline. Perhaps Ben Brown needs to get up the ground when Max is forward? We shall see I guess.

This was never a week, go with a fine if you must for careless, low impact. But really all the Wheatley Robbo comparisons to Dangerfields bump are ridiculous. Yes they both impacted an opponent high but: Dangerfield CHOSE to bump after the ball was gone, hit the player high and knocked him out. Fritsch fended an oncoming tackle and had his arm pushed high by the tackling player, hit him high, no concussion, no injury. Players are allowed to fend, if he had deliberately elbowed him that would be different but it is clear as day he tries to fend with his forearm and the low body of Powell moving down pushes his arm high. It’s an accident that occurred in 0.2 seconds. Not an intentional bump. Also we all hate it but the impact on the other player is important in how they measure these things. Powell was not concussed, had no other injury and came back on the field. If he had been concussed or had his face broken the result might be different, but he didn’t. Im also still mystified as to how this gets cited but Hawkins doesn’t, Hawkins carelessly throws his elbow back after a handball and breaks someone’s eye socket and concusses them. Bailey has his elbow pushed into his opponents head and dazed his for a bit. Why is Bailey’s initially Careless and Medium impact but Hawkins not? Surely Hawkins is Careless and High impact. If ones an accident they’re both an accident, but for Bailey to get cited and Hawkins not just shows the problems with this system. Good on the MFC for appealing, got the result we deserved.

I’m very nervous about the three talls forward too DeeSpencer. It really looked bad in the first half against North, TMac was unsighted, Ben Brown was often double teamed and out marked but when he did bring the ball to ground it felt like our forwardline pressure, which had been fantastic the first 6 weeks, was non-existent. Gawn didn’t do much resting forward either. When TMac moved back we looked a different team. Also I’m excited for Petty but the difference between Petty’s game against Hawthorn and Tom’s second half back against North was marked, Harrison better play a vastly better game if he comes in this week. Particularly if Buddy is back. I still would prefer: Tmac Back, Jones Sub Tomlinson, Baker Out Sparrow, Chandler in but if we’re insisting on Petty I guess it will be: Tomlinson, Baker out Petty, Sparrow in Melksham is on thin ice. I’d be tempted to drop him for Chandler or Bedford.

Brilliant news! Trac is a star and will still get even better as our team improves. There’s real loyalty at our club and it’s started at the top, Jonesy and Gawny have led the way, Viney, Salem and Trac have followed. It’s great for club stability now and our future, something great is building!!!!

It’s a glass half full game IMO. On the one hand when a Melbourne team has failed to turn up like that in the past we have usually failed to get back (see Sydney and Freo last year) so to get the win, a comfortable 30 point win is a great result. Having said that, we can’t bring that first half form in against basically any other side and expect to stay in the game. Particularly not this week against Sydney. On changes one thing that seems to be getting missed is that the major change, that saw us return to our best in the second half was returning to only two big forwards (Brown + Jacko/Gawn) by sending TMac back. While there is no doubt we also lifted in the contest our forwardline looks so much better with two talls being supported by Kozzie, Spargo, ANB, and Fritta. It’s no coincidence they all came into the game more after this move, also our backline looks so much better with a tall taking the first/second forward to free up Lever and May. I get that we have good talls all in form but our best team structure is a two tall + Fritsch forwardline and I don’t think we can continue the three talls experiment against Sydney, particularly given what it looked like in the first half against North. I also like that the club is excited about Petty and what he offers but his first half against the Hawks was not AFL standard and Tom’s second half against North was excellent, including some great field kicking which would’ve been the knock on him. Baker’s pressure and disposal weren’t up to it, gee we miss Viney’s intensity when he’s not there. Melksham was worst on ground in the first half. For those reasons I would have: Out: Tomlinson ??, Baker, Melksham In : Sparrow, Chandler, Harmes (with TMac to go back, Sparrow to play Viney/Bakers role, Chandler to play Jones’ role and Harmes to replace Melksham although Harmesy hasn’t set the world on fire either so this may not happen, Jones to stay medical sub). I’d be tempted to replace B Brown with Weideman too on form but I suspect we will back Ben in and rightly so given his career to date. He’d want to have a good game though.

The ‘behind the goals’ option seems to have disappeared ? Is it possible for the free MFC allocation to run out?! What a terrible system!

Your name is painfully accurate for this topic mono, thanks for the info.

That’s awesome! There’s another beautiful stat as well Titan. We’ve never been behind in any last quarter. The closest any team has come to us is GWS getting 6 points behind. Apart from that we’ve had a 12 point buffer in every game. I find it hard to believe as my severe MFCSS makes me terrified anytime a team kicks a goal on us at any time but we’ve really never been seriously challenged this year at the pointy end of a game. What a strange and wonderful feeling!

Great team win! What a start! If you’d have told me in January that we’d be 4-0 with no Brown, Weideman, Hibberd and Viney for a game I would’ve thought you were mad! Incredible stuff! Also I was hearing a bit of ‘Melbourne haven’t beaten anyone yet’ on the radio this morning and I’m ok with that, keep the lid on. But there’s an interesting stat everyone seems to be missing, everyone Melbourne has beaten has beaten everyone the bulldogs have beaten. Geelong beat Brisbane, Saints beat WC, GWS beat Collingwood, admittedly Freo haven’t played North yet, but I think we can all agree they WILL beat them. So the next time a radio host tells you how incredible the dogs are but Melbourne ‘haven’t beaten anyone yet’ maybe cheekily point this out? While keeping the lid on of course... GO DEES!!!

The main differences were that the dogs took the game incredibly seriously and put their best team on the park while they are gearing up for a serious tilt at smashing the season at the start, while Richmond are the reigning premiers who only played some of their best players in the first half and who, like most reigning premiers are more interested in playing young players in preseason and nursing their best team through their shorter preseason than the rest of the competition. Grand finalists are notoriously slow during preseason due to their later start date. I wouldn’t be getting overly excited about the Tigers game, Dusty playing all four quarters would be enough to change that result.