La Dee-vina Comedia

Err...didn't you say "With all due respect to past administrators much of their time was consumed dealing with political or religious agenda pushers"? You must have had a reason for saying that. It's a bit rich to resile from that statement now you've been called out on it.

Did we actually try to argue that we shouldn't play on Sundays for religious reasons?

This quoting Hibberd seems to support Frost playing in defence...but not necessarily the thought that it would be to free up Lever: Melbourne Footy‏ @MelbourneFooty FollowingFollowing @MelbourneFooty More Michael Hibberd: "With Frosty back this week, it might free me up a bit, which will allow me to use my run and carry, as it's probably my biggest strength." #AFLDeesNorth

Can you give an example of a religious agenda which was being pushed? I don't remember any.

Can you give an example of a religious agenda which was being pushed? I don't remember any.

18 MFC players named plus the 22 for the seniors leaves very few out injured. That's a great position to be in at any time of the season. Part of the reason for Richmond's success last year was having few injuries. As a consequence they not only won the Premiership but their VFL team came second.

I'm not so sure. I suspect Frost is picked for insurance to go to defence only if Brown and Waite cause problems. But team balance suggests to me that the only place for Frost is as a straight swap for Pedersen which means playing forward when he's not playing the second ruckman role. Otherwise I'm struggling like everyone else to see who plays second ruck for about 8 minutes every quarter. I know others have said Petracca, but I can't see that he has the fitness for that. Maybe Melksham? he's spontaneously done it before when a ruckman wasn't near the ball when a throw in occurred (or was it a ball up?) Kent's addition is surprising. I see a couple of possibilities. First, he takes ANB's forward spot with ANB moving to a "full time" on-baller. That has some appeal given ANB's running ability. Alternatively, Kent may take Bugg's spot and Bugg moves up the ground. Either way, I think Lewis is moving permanently to half-back where he's played his best football this year as a replacement for Hunt.

In the last year or so we've seen clubs such as Collingwood, Geelong and Hawthorn talk about poker machines, some for and others against. Yet I don't recall our club engaging in the debate publicly. We've become the first (since North Melbourne quite some time ago now) to take an active step to remove them. I like that we've become a club of action rather than words.

Whether we like it or not, the AFL operates a form of socialism (via the draft, salary cap and distributions from HQ). To do otherwise would see the competition fail with the strongest clubs eventually preventing the weakest clubs from ever improving their position. If that were to occur, the competition would inevitably die. Nevertheless, within this framework clubs need to be accountable for their actions, including financial strength and good governance. We should not, however, confuse real-world economic practice with the needs of a sport like AFL.

No reason...other than we don't seem to be able to pummel any team into the ground. Even when we get 7 goals up with half a match to go.

I agree. In fact, apart from jealousy, why do people care if the rich get richer? Surely what really matters is that the poor get richer. It doesn't have to be a zero sum game.

Here's why and also here

I'm not sure we an play Hannan and Fritsch in the same side at the moment. If Bugg is to go, I'd prefer that he's replaced with a forward with stronger defensive credentials.

Why do I think it was Tony Ongarello?

Let's clarify. The $11 million figure is what the players who play pokies at the MFC venues lose each year. It's not what the club makes. Out of that $11 million comes state tax, GST, payments to staff, equipment costs and a licence fee to the State Government for an entitlement for each poker machine used. According to the club (as reported in the media today), the club makes about $2 million a year from the pokies. That's still a significant amount of money, but to break even we're not talking about having to find a new source of $11 million per year. Edit: I appreciate Cards13 might have been talking about the $11 million that it is reported we might get from selling the Leighoak, not the $11 million per annum lost on the pokies.

I seem to recall State and/or Federal money was provided to the Western Bulldogs to redevelop Whitten Oval on condition that the old poker machine venue there was removed. And maybe something similar down at Kardinia Park, too. It wouldn't surprise me that the decision announced today may be followed by a sequel which announces a new training venue with a significant State and/or Federal financial contribution.

Not today.

I like it when people unwittingly or not use a betting term when discussing gambling.

According to the gaming regulator's website, the Leighoak has 92 pokies entitlements (and therefore 92 poker machines) and the Bentleigh Club has 88. Pokies revenue (which means player losses and is before tax and other operating costs) was $7.7 million in 2016/17. At the Bentleigh Club, revenue was just over $2.5 million. You can find all that data here. A side note of interest is that one of our Directors is Mohan Jesudasson, who used to run the pokies business for Tabcorp. If anyone knows the value of the entitlements and hopefully what the future holds for that business, he should be as well informed as anyone.

Do we own (and therefore are we selling) the LeighOak freehold or just the leasehold?

Also relevantly, both Richmond (Hardwick) and Geelong (Thompson) stuck with coaches for longer than most other clubs would have done. Turned out well for them in the end.

How times have changed. That would have been the strongest argument earlier this decade. Thankfully, now it's the weakest.

I owe Harmes (and Werridee) an apology. I hadn't realised he had so much of the ball (equal 4th for disposals) as well as equal 4th for tackles. Maybe I didn't recognise him in his new number. Note: I've had to quote my own post as the "Edit" option seems to have disappeared. Edit: And now the "Edit" option is back.

I know this gets said a lot so obviously a lot of people agree with you. But I don't. I think he's played his best football for us in the back half. Every mistake he makes gets highlighted but all the good that he does seems to be ignored. I'm very comfortable with him playing as one of our seven defenders.

I suspect if Malthouse was put in charge of the umpires we'd pretty quickly have a severe shortage of umpires. Malthouse's approach is "do it my way or not at all". Given umpiring is part-time, why would someone with another job not take the option of quitting?