Lucifers Hero

...and Jack has one or two up on Selwood I couldn't find any pictures where Selwood got the better of Viney!!

Ladder position aside it is a huge, huge game for the club and sponsors as it is the first Friday night game we have hosted in 5 years! Put in a great performance and we have a better chance of more Friday night games next year and the subsequent benefits for membership, sponsors and merchandising. Of all games to have our big name draw cards out its a shame it is this one as it means attendance and TV audiences won't be maximised. The AFL and TV executives will be watching so the team must put in a competitive, 4 quarter effort and hopefully win (or not lose by much).

It certainly looked that way - there appeared to be a 'good cop', 'bad cop' thing happening, with Roos playing the 'bad cop'; the deliverer of bad news, the stern task master. A number of things stand out in my mind of Roos, the 'bad cop': telling Petracca off for his off season injury. Dropping Watts to Casey. Then a most powerful picture at training of Roos telling Grimes he wasn't being selected. The forlorn, despairing demeanor from Grimes was heart wrenching. And, perhaps the hardest of all was demoting, trading out or delisting past stalwarts. Roos seems to identify with the underdog, the maligned. He lived thru the obliteration of Fitzroy, raised Sydney from the ashes and has played a key role in salvaging a once great MFC from its spiral of self-destruction. He doesn't have premiership player medals, hasn't won a Brownlow but would expect to see him as a Legend in the Hall of Fame for his combined contribution as a player (356 games), captain, coach and media roles. Certainly, ahead of a recent nominee, in Wayne Carey.

Houli gets four weeks. Bit surprised. Following the case suggested otherwise. AFL pulling strings again as it did with the Tribunal during the ESS drugs hearing. Nothing changes!

The AFL isn't doing too well at the Appeal. Houli's lawyer is really stiching them up. The AFL lawyer appears to have stuffed up the initial Tribunal hearing. It is my guess he took the outcome of 4 weeks for granted and has now tried to present new evidence and question evidence that he failed to do at the Tribunal. If the 2 weeks stand, justice will have been done but I doubt it will be seen to have been done and a right royal hornet's nest has been opened!

Only forced changes: Emg: Jack Trengove, Sam Weideman, Dion Johnstone In: Wagner, White Out: Garlett (hamstring), Salem (hamstring) Bit surprised with the Emg: No Kent, JKH or Kennedy - some of the best players at Casey and highly touted on there. 1st Prize goes to @Satyriconhome who first said White will play!

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2017-06-29/white-to-play-first-game-of-season Congratulations Mitch! Mitch is replacing Vand on the list. I have total faith in the our coaching panels decisions. Great faith by them in the young man. Edit: Sorry, didn't realise this was discussed in the Team Selection/Training threads...maybe its worth leaving this thread open to give Mitch a few moments in the sun. Leave it up to the mods.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2017-06-29/roos-views-from-the-outside- Quite a lengthy interview with Roos. Far too many interesting comments to quote. But in summary he is still very loyal and invested in the Dees and barracking for us on Friday night. He is very complementary of many people at the Dees and genuinely delighted for everyone especially those that have been there a long time. A nice little complement for Goodwin and the coaches, many of whom are Goodwin recruits: "The game day stuff, I reckon he could do with his eyes closed, with all due respect, and he’s got a great coaching group around him.”. Goodwin's game day tactics have been enormous for us winning quite a few games - maybe that is what Roos saw when he recruited him to be our coach! What I really liked about the interview is that it is totally selfless. At no stage does he try and claim any credit for our performance - it is all praise for the Board, Club, Coaches and Players. Not many people could resist that temptation. Roos is quite an awesome person! And like others, I will be forever grateful he came to the Dees.

What a weekend for ladder positions: Dees (5th, 8 wins) vs Swans (10th, 6 wins) WB (9th, 7 wins) vs WCE (7th, 7 wins) GWS (1st, 10 wins) vs Cats (3rd, 9 wins) Port (4th, 8 wins) vs Rich (6th, 8 wins) So many classic 8 point games for top 4 contention! We win Friday night and it puts great pressure on the subsequent games especially: Cats, Port and Rich as we go % or game and % clear of them! A Demon win will make them squirm a little! Desperately, hope we win!

Here are two interesting articles on what it takes to win a Finals/Premiersip. Crows: Are they 'tough enough to contend'? http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-29/too-nice-to-contend-pyke-isnt-buying-it I have no doubt we are 'tough enough' - we have shown it over and over again, reaching its peak vs Eagles last week. Giants: Stevie J says they need to find the killer instinct: https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/greater-western-sydney-forward-steve-johnson-says-the-giants-need-to-find-their-killer-instinct/news-story/14491f4c31ec8ddf9c1ca7b42e16aa0b The Dees haven't yet found our 'killer instinct' as we let a few teams off the hook earlier this year. I doubt it will happen again! I think we are not far from Stevie J's description: “When you’re a good team you want to be a ruthless team that plays for four quarters because that’s what it takes to win finals,”. We are a good team and over the last 2 weeks we have played fierce football for the full four quarters. It is just a matter of time before we become ruthless and regularly put teams to the sword. If we keep that up and we make the finals we will be very dangerous and one of the more feared teams. Who would have thought: A dangerous and feared team! Bring on September!

Goodwin has vehemently defended our medical team and "To suggest that it was (described as) forceful enough to knock him over from our medical team was factually incorrect." http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-28/he-doesnt-lie-dees-leap-to-olivers-defence He has also defended Clarrie "One thing I do know about Clayton is he's a tough customer and he doesn't lie," Very diplomatic of Goodwin on Tribunal decision: "Goodwin declined to comment on the Tribunal's decision but said 19-year-old Oliver was not a dishonest person". The club has now officially defended Clarrie and our medical team which, is what I was hoping for. Nothing to do now but accept the umpire's (Tribunal) decision and move on.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-appeals-twomatch-ban-given-to-richmonds-bachar-houli-20170628-gx037b.html The AFL will argue that it is manifestly inadequate to suspend a player for less time for a high impact strike to the head than it is to find a player guilty of a lower impact strike. I think we would all agree!

That wouldn't happen - when the number of memberships with the GF guarantee have been sold each year, it would put up the 'Sold Out' sign on that option.

Just a humble fan who would love to see my club be great again so we need all the members we can get. Also, someone who has a bit of time on their hands to google and research stuff

I think the 30,000 is for both competing club's members. For people interested in knowing more about the guarentee of a GF ticket - It is automatically part of the Redlegs, Trident and Legend 'Premium' packages. It can also be purchased as an add-on with some of the other memberships https://membership.melbournefc.com.au/packages/view/741/Grand-Final-Guarantee Last year the Bulldogs sold out their equivalent 'Premium' packages within 48 hours of the GF. MFC will have limits on how many memberships with GF guarantees it allocates. So anyone who wants a GF guarantee should upgrade now! Once someone has a membership with the GF guarantee it is unlikely they would lose it as the club gives members the option to renew their existing membership before it allocates more of that type. Edit: Memberships close at end of July

The outcome aside, what concerns is the Tribunal process (as reported on the AFL blog) is that the defence cast doubt on what the umpire saw, when Oliver hurt his jaw, the relevance of the mfc medical report and Oliver's reaction after the fall, without apparent evidence (again as reported on the AFL blog). The defense didn't have to prove anything - just made hypothesis sufficient to cast doubt on the key points regarding 'negligible impact' (while ignoring 'intentional', 'high' and 'outside the play'). And because the Tribunal decides on 'the balance of probabilities' Schofield got off. Nothing on the blog suggested the AFL lawyer challenged the hypotheses nor any of or the lack of evidence - don't know what he was doing there. The Olive case is over but the above shows a very slippery slope for future Tribunal hearings. Based on last night the Tribunal will be quite busy in future.

And Schofield takes the moral high ground!: "Speaking after the hearing, Schofield delivered a thinly veiled swipe at Oliver's social media activity. "Being a little bit of a more senior player, I think it's always best to watch from the sidelines when things go to social media, so you didn't hear too much from me," Schofield said". http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-27/more-senior-schofield-happy-to-avoid-social-media-storm Anyone else think Schofield has a very punchable face!

The MRP strikes back! http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-28/mrp-member-queries-houli-good-bloke-defence Nathan Burke: "MATCH Review Panel member Nathan Burke has criticised the use of character references from Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and media personality and academic Waleed Aly in Bachar Houli's defence ...If somebody goes in next week and does exactly the same thing, but doesn't know Waleed Aly, doesn't know the Prime Minister, does that mean they get three or four weeks?" As Daniel Harford notes - discount for good behaviour is one thing but wheeling in the big names in town is another. The Age also takes issue with this: "Turnbull and Aly offered such strong character references for Houli it prompted the AFL tribunal to abandon normal thinking and cut his sentence" "Woods reasonably extrapolated from the punishment schedule that if an offence of intentional, to the head and medium impact was three weeks then an offence worse than that must begin at four weeks and slide upwards depending on the circumstances. It was not envisaged it would slide down". "Indeed it was the same penalty a player would get if they didn't take the MRP's offer of a plea and instead challenged a light brush to the jaw from a deliberately thrown elbow and lost. That's right: someone like Will Schofield going to the tribunal and losing". http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/bachar-houli-its-absurd-that-a-prime-minister-got-a-footy-players-suspension-cut-20170627-gwzxjy.html The Tribunal has made a rod for the MRP's back. Anything goes now! Anyway, it is good to see some outrage on this issue - may take some heat off Clarrie.

Not guilty! Now watch the media hyena pack go to town on Clarry. Facts irrelevant. Sickening!!

My recollection of the vision is that was before Schofield hit Oliver not after. After, Oliver lay on the ground while everyone else was in a melee. Grrrr! Why don't they look at the vision while Grace, QC is saying this - he is wrong!!

That newspaper report is a deliberate change of the words Oliver used in the post game Ch7 interview. I am appalled a QC would use that and not show the actual vision of the interview. But, the Tribunal works on balance of probabilities. So Grace Qc, has cast doubt on: what the umpire saw, when Oliver was hit the relevance of the medical report because he asserted there was no diagnosis by the doctor. Uses a twisted newspaper report rather than the actual vision. uses the sequence of events incorrectly Grace QC has probably succeed in casting sufficient doubt on the balance of probabilities. Schofield will get off.

Now Grace QC is saying Oliver hurt his face when he struck Schofield's spine and the MFC medical report was based on Oliver' self reporting rather than a 'diagnosis by the doctor'. Therefore medical report should be ignored...#fakelogic

"David Grace QC said Rosebury's eyes aren't looking at the incident, based on the photo. Rosebury said he was looking. Grace is trying to show the jury his phone. Grace has now presented his phone to the jury so they can see the phone". You would think a lawyer would have the photos printed out to a reasonable size and put on a screen rather than a phone of a few inches which has to be handed from one tribunal member to another. Very cunning by lawyer!

Follow proceedings here: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-27/live-houli-schofield-front-the-afl-tribunal Can't see how Schofield can plead not guilty to striking when his lawyer agrees it was intentional and high contact (but negligible force).

I doubt it. The nearest umpire said he thought it was 'careless'. And, I doubt the AFL would want one of its multicultural ambassador's out for too long.