La Dee-vina Comedia

And I think you could also add: Significantly improved fitness levels Playing as a team instead of as individuals Better understanding of the game plan Added maturity to younger players like Watts, Tapscott, Strauss, Jetta, etc

And Liam Jurrah missed out. So much talent. What a shame.

Interesting how the rookie draft has effectively replaced the PSD as the mechanism for recruiting other team's discards. Not surprising really now that rookies can be any age. Certainly provides clubs with a cheaper option than a full contract and because of that I suspect more players are getting second chances. Good luck to them all, ex-Melbourne, or not. And I'm personally a little disappointed for Matthew Bate that he couldn't find another home.

I knew he was good, but didn't realise he played his first game when he was ten years old! Actually, my cousin, who played with the ammos, tried out with the MFC the same day Robbie Flower did. This would have been early 1970s. In those days they played actual games (practice matches, if you like) to see who was worth pursuing. My cousin played the whole game. Robbie, however, only played 10 minutes, then they took him off. They realised straight away they had a gem and promoted him on the spot to the under-19s squad.

Facile journalism. The "probe" has two parts. One is the investigation being conducted by Brett Clothier and his team. The second is the action which the Commission might choose to take. The second action can only occur after the first is completed and only if the first produces evidence that there is a case to answer. It is quite possible that the first stage has been completed or could be completed any time between now and February. Any proper investigation will be conducted without being linked in any way to scheduled meetings of the Commission. What Ralph has done is connect the two where no connection actually exists. It's like saying a police criminal investigation has to be completed before the Supreme Court rises for its summer break. What nonsense.

This might give you some idea. At one game against Richmond at the MCG, when kicking out after a Richmond behind, we'd put all our players on one side of the ground except Robbie. He was left on his own on the other side with his Richmond opponent. (Remember, this is in the days of man-on-man and no flooding/press etc). Richmond kicked something like 18 behinds. Out of the 18 returns, Robbie won all bar one. If I recall correctly, that might have been the last game for that particular Richmond coach. (May have been Francis Bourke - but who knows, they went through so many). Robbie was the visual equivalent of liquid Lindt chocolate.

I seem to recall him resisting the captaincy at Carlton but ended up taking it on because at the time there was no-one else anywhere near suitable. Now they have some good options (no, not you, Brock).

The interesting thing about Richmond is that they took Miller and A Maric. It's another way of saying Richmond's top end is good, but they fall away very quickly after that.

At the risk of getting howled down, the Age article and this thread add weight to the argument that perhaps all our problems are not related to poor draft choices. Maybe amateurish training methodologies contributed, too. This story continues the positive view I've had of Neeld since he started - he appears to have come with a co-ordinated, highly developed strategy which is not just about a game plan but looks at all aspects which make a successful team including recruitment, fitness, game style, player character and even age distribution of the playing group. I just hope that he can convert all this hard work into on-field success.

I've just read this thread from start to finish. Congratulations to all posters (bar one, but I won't bother naming him/her) for what has been a glorious foray into football, geography, meteorology, physiology, music, history and politics. And some stuff about the actual purpose of the trip to Darwin. This is why I like Demonland.

It would be amusing if Adelaide jumped in before Sydney and used pick 10 on Kurt Tippett.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but are you suggesting that the problem should be ignored until he actually breaks down? If so, I'm really glad you're not part of our footy department. And I hope you're not a doctor, either.

I think you left out one...the players' managers. And my suspicion is that the managers are the ones who 'gossip' about what they were able to get a player as a way of marketing their own business.

I just browse for the articles...

Yes, I think it was the best part of 1998 and 1999. Then came back in 2000 when...well, you know the rest.

Congratulations to Andy for the new Demonland banner. How he got match.com to put up pictures of all those women immediately under the parade of stars amazes me. What a triumph. (If other posters have not been blessed with match.com's incessant banner advertising, the above won't make sense, but consider yourself lucky).

If anyone needs help looking on the bright side, don't forget James Hird overcame serious foot issues to become a reasonably good player.

Thanks Cards13. (But you might want to change your footer).

The conspiracy theorists might like to wonder whether Anderson's departure is involuntary and linked to criticism of his handling of the tanking investigation in 2009. I suspect it's more likely that after 9 years he's decided he wants a change. Perhaps he'll go back to the law.

As posted elsewhere, Caro claims Adrian Anderson has quit.

Caro claims Adrian Anderson has quit.

Demetriou having a Press Conference at 12.15pm today (5 December) and The Age is tweeting that Caro is about to break a "big" AFL story.

The important point here being lost in the alleged tanking debate is the transparency of the AFL's processes. While I'm satisfied investigations - whether it is into allegations of tanking, draft tampering, salary cap breaches or players betting on football matches - should be done behind closed doors, I'm not so sure about the Commission's determinations on these matters. If it's good enough for our criminal and civil court processes to be conducted in public, perhaps it's time for AFL deliberations also to be. I accept that matters involving personal matters should be kept private, but I'm not so comfortable that matters involving the actions and behaviours of clubs should be.

Perhaps the AFL should be investigating Andrew Demetriou's involvement in tanking, sorry, alleged tanking, instead of Melbourne FC.

Sorry, Old Dee. Disagree with you this time. Having a 'heritage banner' isn't a symbol of failure. And it makes the site Administrators' job easier because they don't have to keep changing it when a current player, for whatever reason, needs to be removed. Another poster has suggested including David Neitz. I can't quite work out why I think this, but somehow I don't believe he deserves it. Am I being too harsh?