Lucifers Hero

My point was that he didn't refute that EFC position. Quote from my post: He may be stating the inevitable but the Patrick Smith that had argued strenuously for what is right and good had backed off. Last year's Patrick Smith would have said something like 'EFC and AFL may want Hird to coach on but that just ain't on folks'! No way Jose!! And, this is why! By choosing to not continue with his Hird must go narrative, vehemently or otherwise, Smith seems to have considerably softened his public position and in my book it does not bode well for a balanced media discussion of the Tribunal outcome.

1. On p 115 of this thread post 2866 references an article written by him arguing James Hird will coach on regardless of the Tribunal's decision. This was the first sign that he had changed his extremely strong position that Hird had to go. For 2 years he had written articles arguing vehemently for Hird to resign or be sacked. 2. On his segment on KB's SEN program he has continued with the Hird is safe narrative. He may be stating the inevitable but the Patrick Smith that had argued strenuously for what is right and good had backed off. Last year's Patrick Smith would have said something like 'EFC and AFL may want Hird to coach on but that just ain't on folks'! No way Jose!! And, this is why! 3. Bearing in mind that Smith was an Essendon supporter until about 5 years ago when he was so disgusted with the cloak and dagger way EFC sacked Knights and appointed Hird, he refused to have anything to do with them thereafter. EFC club officials (CEO, I think) have been talking with him and he has said he is open to invitations to the club. So, in my book he has gone over to the other side. I try not to have personal opinions of journos so assess their articles on a case by case basis. Throughout the whole EFC thing he and Caro have stood out (Gerard Whately gave in at the half-way mark) IMO as the only journos who have maintained the rage against the morality of what happened. I have lost much respect for Patrick and Gerard on their altered positions. Why have their positions altered? I don't know. Political expediency/protecting their jobs comes to mind. Caro now appears to be the only hope of getting some rational discussion of the Tribunal outcome. But she has been very quiet so I'm not holding out hope of balanced journalism. BTW I believe EFC have also met with Caro to 'discuss her position'. I fear now that journos either write/say positive stuff or say/write nothing at all to not rock the EFC/HIrd boat. I hope my assessment is wrong because not only is freedom of the press important so is an independent press. I fear the latter is all but gone on the EFC doping saga. That may well turn out to be the 'darkest day in sport'.

Yes, even Patrick Smith has now capitulated. Leaves only Caro to tow the anti-doping, anti-Hird line. She has gone quiet, hasn't capitulated (yet) but seems to be keeping her powder dry. There may be a guilty verdict but the press will manage the narrative to be line with AFL's wishes ie play it down, let Hird do his job ra ra ra. After all, Smith and Wilson rely heavily on the AFL feed machine for their material. Every chance some 'negotiation' has happened between the AFL and journo's. The old you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours routine comes to mind!

Leaving aside Essendon...that could easily be the 2015 end of H & A season ladder, in reverse! And we would still make the 8!

Totally agree, 2 Vic teams should go (altho don't know it would be North or Bulldogs). They won't while CEO of AFL remuneration is based on Total Revenue. They need 9 games a week (18 teams) for the next TV rights. If as mooted the next TV rights will be for 10 years there will be 18 teams for quite some time. Unfortunately, there will be very little change in the top 8 and bottom 8 in that time.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/essendon-top-up-players-kept-in-dark-on-game-plan/story-e6frf3e3-1227267503091 "ESSENDON is not revealing its game plan to top-up players to avoid secret strategies being leaked to other clubs.The Bombers are holding separate team meetings for its senior list and the 13 top-up players who have joined the club during the NAB Challenge." Hardly motivational for the 13 players that may be playing for EFC for some part of the season! EFC seems to find new high levels of arrogance and new low levels of integrity.

While I didn't always agree (did mostly) with Dees2014 posts I found his input very valuable and informative. I'm sure most and probably all DL's feel the same. So Dees2014 we want you back!

WOW! Fabulous news! Looks like our best 22 will be available for rnd 1!

Great! Thanks AzzKika!

It isn't quite as bad as it looks: "While half the total debt is regarded by the clubs as "good debt", such as money owed on profitable gaming venues, Nisbett said" ie there are tangible, profitable assets supporting that $50m Notwithstanding this, his basic point is very valid - that a lot of clubs are fooling themselves and aren't viable, spending money knowing the AFL will backroll them. I doubt the 'watered down' Equalisation package will really help the 'poorer' clubs very much. I don't know what the answer is. I do know that if the AFL signs 10 year TV rights, (predicated on 18 teams) to maximise AFL revenue (the basic KPI for Gil's bonus/remuneration) then the problem will continue.

Dees2014 (unfortunately) seems to have banned himself from posting on DL. His response to a similar question is on Post #678 on page 28 of this thread. Extract from the post: "That is exactly what I am saying, and Hird's relentless and expensive public campaign has been designed to position him as the innocent party supported by constant articles from tame journalists saying the players will get off. Judges will be highly influenced by this, as will be their existing prejudices about AFL football." We will know in two weeks. In the meantime I hope Dees2014 starts posting again.

Thnx. I will get my android tablet hooked into the 'smart tv' and see how that goes and/or find software that can connect the two. Bit difficult to watch a whole game on a tablet/phone.

Does anyone know if live stream (with or without app) is available for a 'smart TV'? Cheers Perhaps I should re-phrase that: Does the AFL live stream app work on a 'smart TV' or only on mobile devices?

Another question is how many players are still rolling the dice and getting away with it! The odds of getting away with it are in their favour as there aren't many tests made each year.

All that is true DA. However, we have a whole team who indulged that grey area and may not pay the price. EFC players are pleading being duped (simpletons?) and if they are found guilty and don't get 2 years then it becomes a farce.

Just to correct my earlier post: Apparently, 'provisional suspension' is voluntary when it is a 'specified' substance. Not sure of the exact definition of this but goes along the lines that it is banned only on match day and could be included in various over the counter products. It sounds very similar to the circumstances for Saad. Crowley may well get 2 years for being careless. Makes a mockery of the whole code when these guys can go along with the process then get 2 years for being careless whereas others fight tooth and nail to camouflage something more sinister (Ess players) and we are yet to see if they get hit with a small slap or a serious penalty.

Rightly or wrongly 'provisional suspension' is voluntary. The AFL and a Club's own Integrity Unit (technically) cannot tell the club management/coaches who the player is. Ess players also chose date to activate their (voluntary) 'provisional suspension'...such are the rules! Edit: I would bet that a player who thinks he is innocent (ala Ess players) would not opt to take (voluntary) 'provisional suspension' if it was 'in-season'!

Great to see a win for the Scorps, albeit a practice match. Will be great for their confidence and also puts the seniors on notice that this year there are guys eager and able to take their place. Should keep the seniors weekly starting 22 on their toes! Very good day whichever way we look at it!

Will always think MC is a dog with no morals, be it for what he did while at the club or the way he crapped on the club by leaving. However, I am past using any emotional energy on him. I don't wish him any mental or physical anguish/injury. What I do hope for is that we go past Geelong on the ladder and we play heaps of finals while they don't , that we win our next GF before Geelong do and that MC is still at Geelong when we do. Thrashing them a few times while on the way to GF would also be nice. Let our footy do the talking, I say! Those things will give me sweet revenge!

Dees2014, I'm interested to know on what grounds players can appeal a guilty decision? As it isn't a court of law the usual bases like 'faulty' evidence, or error in application of the law (presumably) don't apply. If players appeal a guilty decision does the criteria of 'comfortable satisfaction' change? Journos keep saying players will appeal a guilty decision but don't say on what grounds...can you help, please

Are Essendon clearing the decks? Very unusual for a President Chairman of an AFL Club to comment on another. Peter Gordon suggests that Linday Tanner, who has a strong background in occupational health and safety may be being lined up to replace Little. More here: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/little-thinking-about-succession-planning-suggests-top-bulldog-20150313-1436kt.html This makes it easier for Worksafe to hit them with a feather as nearly all the coaching (except a notable one who was just doing what he was told), all the management and most of the Board have already been replaced. EFC will argue that they have fixed their poor governance, replaced the culprits, been punished by the AFL for poor governance, so no need for Worksafe to do anything else. There is 'sting' happening here folks!!!

Just for you dc I went in search of the reference: "He also predicted a similar result this year to the $161,000 profit posted for 2014, which followed a $3 million statutory loss basically inherited by Jackson the previous year. After becoming debt free under the presidency of Jim Stynes several administrations previously, Melbourne have built up a current debt of $7.5m, which Jackson confidently predicts will be reduced by half within two years. “This club has a very bright future,” he said." from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/demons-plot-a-path-to-finals-footy-by-2016/story-e6frg6n6-1227260519589 This quote also explains the $3.0m we had to borrow in 2013 was to cover the 'loss basically inherited by Jackson the previous year'. Note: I've edited my latest post to read 'in 2 years'

I was also curious about this, so I had a look at our official accounts. The $7.5m isn't obvious so it must be several figures combined. It also depends on what is defined as 'Debt'. To give a little insight: It seems that 'Total Liabilities' have actually gone down from $14.0 in 2013 to $12.9m in 2014. Of this 'Loans' (in layman terms) in 2014 are $1.2m for gaming and $3.7m for operating. (Total $4.9m). The operating 'loan' facility was created during 2013, so there was no new debt last year. We can relax (sort of) as our overall debt position hasn't changed during 2014 but it is somewhat disconcerting that in 2013 we had to borrow about $3.m for operations. This was in addition to the AFL extra dollars to restructure. The good news is that I read somewhere that PJ expects our 'debt' to be halved in the next 2 years. Edit change to 2 years in last sentence. Hope this helps those that were also curious.

When presented with these two sets of facts I will take Redleg's thanks!

TDI, the derision in your posts in many threads is getting boring. It isn't necessary and it is not becoming. In fact, it undoes all the good work in your training reports. This thread was going along fine with any angst aimed at MC, generally respectfully. Now you've turned your angst onto a fellow poster with this rather juvenile jibe. Sorry to criticise your posting TDI but sometimes you go OTT!