Diamond_Jim

It continues: Caroline Wilson with some huge news on Lachie Whitfield, Graeme Allan and Craig Lambert "Caroline Wilson said on 3AW "highly incriminating" text messages sent by Whitfield to his former partner had formed part of the investigation. "Some unbelievable evidence has come to light," she said on Sports Today. "I have absolutely no doubt there will be a lengthy suspension." Apparently there is now a claim to the affect that the texts to his girlfriend were a "lie".

would you tag Riewoldt?

And that is why we have struggled. Remove Lewis and put a question mark against Pederson and you are down to three (only two of which were drafted by MFC).... so in six -10 years or so of drafting we came up with 2 long term players..... (wonder if any other club was that bad) Luckily the 25 and under group look a little stronger (fingers crossed)

against the Saints at Docklands.... the Double Hoodoo..... sounds like a horse.... wonder what odds will be on offer !!

If you look at why the Dogs made the finals it was simple. They beat the teams outside the 8. When we do that on a reasonably consistent basis we have a chance of becoming a force in the league. I live in hope. By the way the team being talked up as the big improver for next year is the GC Suns.

Perhaps 31 could become the number given to our captain. It would be a nice tradition and would remove the expectation factor that falls on younger players who are given the number.

We picked up two senior players and a maybe. Our history on importing senior players is not great (no need to name them) but these two look okay. We have youth and few senior players so it was an obvious but pleasing result. Ask me end of next year. Hopefully Lewis and Hibberd can have an injury free year and both feature in the top 12 of our B&F. If yes.... we had a win

Boy that music puts you to sleep !! Were they seconds or firsts games he was playing? The crowd was almost zero !!! (Perhaps they were NAB cup/challenge games)

But no one will pay a senior players wage (as he was when the 3 year contract was negotiated) for a VFL level player of his age. We probably need to subsidise his salary to some level. My feeling is minimum wage plus 50% to 100% is fare for Dunn. At a reported salary of $300K that means about third- half his wage will stay on our books

The best thing to come out of the bye is the Thursday night match in the first round Makes that first week a great four days of football Move the Brownlow to the first Thursday after round 23 (all players can attend as the next match is not until the following Thursday) and play the Women's grand Final on the Saturday night at Docklands with cheap admission to encourage attendance

4 years for stupidity .... and the magnificent 34 got off with one season for participating in an uncontrolled drug festival..... where's the balance

Just noticed a later press release re Etihad Seems that the first deal was for ownership of the freehold/leasehold. They needed to do another deal to acquire the management rights. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-07/afl-acquires-management-rights-of-etihad-stadium Makes sense..... wonder how much it cost

you can never ever have enough "Good" midfielders. The only question was price (salary) and what we would have to give away. My only surprise about Rockcliff is that some other club was not seriously interested. Perhaps there is a reason. If he is a free agent next year and walks Brisbane will probably get a good compensatory pick which is likely to be better than anything most clubs could offer them. Rockcliff's 2017 salary to Brisbane is probably irrelevant..... they have to spend it on someone Just some thoughts............

The reports speak of a "negotiated penalty" Perhaps a counselling or education program is my bet on the afl repsonse. Maybe a fine on top but anymore from the AFL would surprise me given their track record. Of course if he were only a bit player at a lesser club they might thorw the book at them all. (O such cynicism)

On the salary issue.... let's be real. I would be happy at anywhere over 60% as I gather it is only for one year. In the meantime we get to have a real look at a late draft pick a rookie whatever that can possibly make our team in 2018. 60% of Dunn's salary will cover that cost well and truly. We know Dunn is not going to be part of the future and that he is only there for insurance at best. Love or hate Hawthorn and for that matter the Dogs of a few years ago but there is little benefit in carrying senior players to the end of their days. (And yes we did not treat Junior well.)

If true I am happy for Lynden. He is obviously not part of the present MFC game plan and he deserves a chance elsewhere. (Just wish it was somewhere other than Collingwood !!!)

Very happy about the move 3 year contract, age 31 at start of next season and from what I understand a decent salary. A risk but in the absence of any comparative senior talent on our list a risk worth taking. Cannot help but think about all the other players who have crossed to the Dees at similar stages of their careers. Few have really succeeded. I look forward to this being one of those successes.

Like most years on this site.......... we always enjoy the pre-season until the reality hits Hopefully next year is different .............but

The name given to a great movie about the failed WWII Operation Market Garden. If successful it might have ended the war by Christmas 1944.... the Allies would probably have beaten the Russians to Berlin.... the Cold War would have been very different from a geographical standpoint. Relevance to the Dees landing Lewis..... probably none but a nice diversion !!

I made this point a few weeks back. If true it is an enormous loophole...... why limit it to coaching.... the job could be anything Surely you cannot commit to a job after football and it is outside the salary cap. For example we want to get Garland out of our salary cap so we offer him his existing salary plus a one year sweetener to retire from the MFC list and be an "on field mentor" at Casey. It cannot be that easy.

For anyone who is fluent in German here is the link to website of the Swiss Federal Court. I had a quick look at the English section but so far no luck. My understanding from the AFL site was that the judgement was in German and had been embargoed until the players were informed. That time has obviously passed. http://www.bvger.ch/recht/00551/index.html?lang=en On a lighter side... I found the Swiss court link via an article (below) on a Swiss news site..... Has a heading .... "Not a G'Day" and features a picture of a Melbourne player being tackled by an Essendon player http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/not-a-g-day_swiss-court-rejects-appeal-by-banned-australian-rules-players/42508834

Those quotes relate to the AFL tribunal which found them not guilty. Bit like the argument that because the CAS decision was 2-1 that more judges (counting the AFL tribunal members) found them to be innocent.... (flawed logic)

Main reason is that the AFL tribunal applied the burden of proof argument in a completely different way to CAS (chain vs string) To extend that statement: AFL tribunal looked for proof that what the players were given was Drug X CAS said Danks ordered it.... Drug X was in the fridge..... players were given drugs.... reasonable to assume it included Drug X (Simplistic but the AFL Tribunal looked for direct evidence whereas CAS was happy to rely on circumstantial evidence)

http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Arbitral_Award_WADA_ESSENDON.pdf

I think the Court of Appeal decision is required reading for every fan who is interested in this subject. It is not that long and as far as legal judgements go it is in relatively plain English. The Court deals with each argument and then dismisses it with unequivocal logic. (They even look at the youth argument.)