poita

Gawn captain. Some combination of Viney, McDonald and Jetta as deputies. Neither May nor Lever deserve to be anywhere near the leadership group until they can put together a full season of consistently strong performances.

Great to see that our injury list still includes Vandenberg, Kolodjashnij, Smith, Nietschke and Hannan. The same five fringe players who crippled our depth for (almost the) entirety of last season. Add Bennell into the mix and we are carrying far too many players who miss far too much football. If May, McDonald and Gawn don't play 20 games each this year we are screwed.

There was an article in the herald sun a little while ago comparing basic 11 game membership prices and contents: https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/heres-how-to-find-the-best-afl-membership-deal/news-story/d7220bad569c78023e7a3cb758ab3b4a Our prices are generally around $20 more expensive than Richmond's at all age levels, despite us winning just 2 of 11 home games last season. It is no wonder that our numbers are down.

This conversation seems to resurface every few weeks. This is less about Nathan Jones and more about the 20 players on the list who failed to step up and take his spot last year. Jones played 22 games last season because he was seen as a far better option, even when the season was shot, than the likes of JKH, Stretch, J.Wagner and a bunch of others who have previously been given many opportunities and failed every time. I expect Jones to play round 1 and he will hold his spot until someone puts together a solid enough run of performances at Casey to take it off him. Given our lack of depth and his durability, there is every chance he will play game 300 in round 15.

My only criticism of AFLW at present is that there should be 10 teams max - the original 8 plus Geelong and West Coast. The remaining Melbourne teams are just diluting the talent pool and Gold Coast is completely unnecessary. You can see how critical the best 5 - 6 players are to each team, and if that top level was stretched to 8 - 10 players per team you would see a much higher standard of play. The endeavour and the physicality is first rate. The younger players coming through who have 10 years of junior football behind them have significantly better skills and better game sense than the players who have been parachuted in from other sports. Give them 2 - 3 years to build up physically and they will raise the standard further. I can appreciate the differences between AFL and AFLW and the low scoring doesn't overly bother me, although the kicking for goal still seems to be an issue for some players. I thought Saturday's performance was solid and Melbourne probably were a 2-3 goal better side. The mid tier seems to have taken a big step forward between seasons. I was concerned about our lack of marking options up forward prior to the season and our inability to convert possession and scoring opportunities into goals is probably the only thing stopping us being genuine premiership chances.

Laumumba was the most overrated player in the competition (by far) during his time at Collingwood, but at least he was interested in playing football at that stage of his career. By the time he came to Melbourne it was all about Harry and what the club could do for him, and football was just a means to an end. He was soft, lazy and completely disinterested. Some of the rose coloured assessments of Lamumba as a Melbourne player at the time were sickening to read.

I'd love to know how many new members we have picked up in the past ten years from the Casey region. Surely that is the only metric that matters, particularly given that the football team has been diabolical for most of that period and hence the facilities at Casey Fields are clearly not providing us with any benefit.

As others have said, it appears our only pathway to profitability at present relies on a combination of us finishing top 4, hosting two home finals and screwing over existing members. This is completely unsustainable for any club, let alone one that plays finals once every 13 years. It is astonishing that we would drop lucrative sources of revenue without replacements ready to go, but that is the mentality of the powers-that-be. It is more important to be seen to be doing good rather than actually doing good. As much as a training venue would be nice, our main priority has to be to acquire a social club in our heartland area which can be a meeting point for supporters. Done properly it would replicate the investments of clubs such as Hawthorn and Collingwood which have been incredibly lucrative. Bentleigh Club offers nothing for supporters and is only accessible by car - we can and must do better.

Totally agree. Throw in 10% price increases, 1 top 8 finish in 13 years and the general incompetence around keeping members informed, and the value for money reduces further. I pay for reserved seats in a Melbourne-only bay, but every week there are opposition supporters streaming in without scrutiny. The club can and must do better.

A disgraceful result delivered by a board and CEO that appear woefully out of their depth. On the back of record membership numbers and substantial gouging of existing members through increased fees, the result is a $1.5M loss. And for all the talk of reduced gate receipts, these were higher than last year. The key number is a $1M drop in sponsorship, which is incredible given the hype around the club at the start of the year. I can't wait to see what happens when our membership drops 10 - 20% this year. At this rate we will be bankrupt within three years. The decision to drop pokies will not stop a single person from using them. All it means is that instead of a sporting club that provides some community benefits receiving this money, it goes into the pockets of some rich bloke, possibly overseas. At least the sporting clubs might engage with addicts to change their behaviour. When the noisy minority succeeds in ridding the AFL of pokies, what will be the next target? Alcohol - goodbye Tyrells. Petrol powered cars - goodbye Jaguar. We can't afford to bow to every lobby group that knocks on our door. I, like everyone else, would prefer the club to have 11 games in Melbourne. That is not our reality however, and the decision to dump the Darwin game will result in another massive loss of income. Gary Pert needs to stop wheeling out platitudes and make it very clear what his plan is to bring in the several million dollars of revenue each year that is required to replace the Darwin income and the pokies income.

Thanks to all concerned for the training reports. I cannot comprehend why Kolodjashnij is still on the list if he is not even doing basic training at this point of the pre season. The chances of him recovering to play a meaningful role this year seem incredibly low. St Kilda came to an arrangement with McCartin who is a much better prospect, not sure why we can't do the same with KK. Surely it would be in his best interests as well to get his health sorted for his long term well being, without worrying about meeting the expectations of a professional football club. (That's not to say that we still shouldn't give him all the support he needs.)

Unless the players and coaches ask for it, a 20 minute break is completely unnecessary. As the players seem to want a shorter break, 15 minutes (or 10) is fine by me. Unlike most people I come to the football to watch the game, so anything else (half time entertainment, food & drink, etc) is completely irrelevant. As an aside, I'm not sure why people are still whining about the cost of food at the football. Nobody makes you buy it - spend five minutes packing your own and the problem is solved.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/teams/afl Does anyone have a photo of Dunkley, Lockhart or Nietschke that they can forward to the club?

Thanks to those who attend training and write reports for those of us at work. My two questions: 1. What is the current status of Vandenberg and Kolodjashnij? Are they in full training with rest days or are they still on light duties? We can't afford to carry multiple fringe players on the injury list all season again. 2. Are there any signs that Hibberd can turn around his recent decline, or is he simply playing out the final year of his career?

The first tall forward we've brought in over the past three years, whilst delisting or trading about six others, so this is long overdue. Brown is not a star, but will do his job most weeks. Hopefully this will give Weideman a nudge that he is not a guaranteed round 1 starter unless he pulls his finger out. At this stage I'd have Brown and Petty well ahead of Weideman. I'd also love to know why we've signed him now after passing on all pre season and rookie draft picks four days ago. He must have trained the house down on Monday.

Yes, how hard is it to have a couple of forwards blocking for each other and then leading in different directions. It was the number one reason I wanted to keep Pedersen - he did so much work off the ball that went unnoticed, but you'd look up and suddenly McDonald or Hogan was three metres clear of his opponent. Our forward line coaching was abysmal last year - even with Weideman having no impact and McDonald struggling, there is enough talent in there to kick a competitive score.

I don't have a view either way on Jackson or Pickett and I hope they are both 200+ game players for the club. The highlights packages are encouraging, but I could come up with a decent highlights package for my 9 year old son after 2 years of football too. Rivers addresses a key need with Hibberd declining fast. It is a risk taking interstate players, particularly at the top end of the draft. That said, I am firmly of the view that ruckmen don't win premierships, and I'm not convinced that small forwards do either, so I am not thrilled with these choices. It has now been four years since we have taken either a genuine midfielder or key position player with a top 25 pick. That is not only dumb, it is bordering on being negligent. We have no depth in these parts of the ground and we are in a world of trouble if the likes of McDonald, May or Oliver are injured at any stage of this season. We painted ourselves into a corner by resigning a bunch of C graders in September, which limited our options in the lead up to the draft. I would have loved to have split pick 12 into 2 later picks, but we didn't have the list spots to make use of them. Other clubs were able to make use of live trading to get the players they wanted. I find it hard to believe that Pickett wouldn't have been available later on, and perhaps we could have had a crack at Robertson or Kemp as well. And for a club who supposedly doesn't leak any more, our trade and draft priorities have been widely known well ahead of time. If we didn't broadcast to the world that we wanted Pickett, perhaps he would have still been available in the 20s where he was originally rated. Other clubs are much better at keeping their cards close to their chests.

"We just weren't prepared for what the game was going to demand". That is inexcusable on so many levels.

It sounds like the bloke we took in the second round two years ago, and how's that working out? I know he's a much different player to Spargo, but the stats don't lie. If we are desperate for a small forward I'm sure we can find one at 28.

Seems a much better prospect at pick 10 than any small forward - I'll be disappointed if we overlook he or Kemp to take Pickett.

Key position players should be the number one priority in the first round, but ruckmen are not key position players. The issue with all of Cook, Weideman and Watts is/was the lack of hunger for the contest. Weideman in particular with his size should be crashing packs and knocking blokes over, but he plays like he has the build of Fritsch or Hannan. He was simply a poor selection given the other key forwards in that draft. Back on Jackson, I'll be bitterly disappointed if we select him. There is little chance we can develop him as a ruckman with Gawn and Preuss dominating game time at both AFL and VFL level, unless we have injuries. There is very little evidence that he can play as a genuine key forward and any thought of him playing as a midfielder is pure speculation. Ruckmen are inconsequential to building a premiership team, hence why only one ruck taken with a first round draft pick in the past 20 years has played in a premiership. Key position players and genuine midfielders should be our only thoughts in the first round of the draft. That is what premiership teams are built on.

Remind me again where Eddie Betts and Charlie Cameron were drafted. And, more importantly in the context of this conversation, how many premierships each has won. Small forwards are great if you can get one cheap, but they don't win you premierships (with the obvious exception of Cyril Rioli who is considerably more than just a small forward).

Our drafting has been largely woeful (with a few obvious exceptions) for more than a decade, so people are right to be concerned. The criticisms are generally not of the players, but of highly paid recruiting staff who make poor decisions on draft night.

That would be an absolute, unmitigated disaster that will set this club back years and years. It breaks every drafting rule in the book.