CBDees

We can do a lot better than Iselect!

Trengove would also have been a good captain if we had delisted him from our AFL list and moved him to the Casey list rather than jettisoning Casey’s B&F to the Power! Do you think he’d come back? Love him to play a part in a Casey Demons Premiership!

It is presided over by a NIMBY (who professes to be a Melbourne supporter but isn’t)! He is too [censored] to have skeletons! I used to be on Committee but am no longer but happy to form part of a group to stand and unseat them!

It seems that the East Melbourne Group has been campaigning against it. Pretty powerful lobby when they mobilise! Perhaps some Demonlanders should run for their committee? ?

This is where the recruitment of Preuss may be a master stroke!

I went to school with Carl Dietrich! I decided it safer to gravitate to the basketball court at lunch and recess rather than risk my life taking on Carl and his cronies playing kick-to-kick!

Especially horse racing ?

Who explained it to you? ?

Will 5 get us May + KK or do we need to end up with steak knives out of any deal to ensure we get KK (especially as a replacement for Hunt if he is traded)?

We know Kent’s quality (and so do St Kilda) so a swap would not be to either Club’s detriment if Long is as good as they are trying to portray!

It probably has and they are astute proposing the built facilities entirely on railway reservation land with no encroachment onto Yarra Park. My view is a training oval is only replacing grassland with curated grassland and tree loss would be minimal. Even if we put a post and rail fence to define the oval, it would remain accessible to the local residents and general public, pretty much as it is now and the training times when it isn’t will be less time than when it currently is inaccessible as a car park. If it is an oval, then it will cease to be a car park so,the residents will be better off.

Yesterday I shared a tram with the President of the East Melbourne Group on his way to VCAT! Now he professes to be a MFC supporter (but I think that he is too tight to take out a membership) so I was happy for him to ask me what I thought about the proposed training facility. I am right behind this project (and have lived in East Melbourne for twice as long as he has) and I told him that I felt that it would be great for the local community as an asset and the football public. It came as no surprise to hear that he is against it (as he is a classic NIMBY and opposes everything) so I suspect that I may have to re-enter local politics and try and prevent their opposition. Any other East Melbourne residents on Demonland happy to put together a ticket to take over the East Melbourne Group?

Gawn better stay for the same reason! ?

I estimate approximately half the MCC members who ‘follow’ Melbourne actually “support” them by taking out MFC memberships. (They are not respected!) Should we continue on our upward trajectory, the pressure will be there to put their hands in their pockets. I expect an increase next year and the year after.

Why aren’t 30,000 of them members? ?

I have been listening on a Russian Super-Yacht in the Maldives! ? They all think that I am mad! ?

Your spelling is a tragedy in itself! Haven’t you got spell-check?

No I suspect that you have it right (judging from Google Maps) and there is an adjacent play area as well. Obviously the MFC proposal would have to limit itself to the railway land (which may involve a 99year lease or purchase?) as apportioning/alienating ‘public land’ would be a step too far. Perhaps the Club is planning administrative functions on the lower levels (with a pleasant view of the trees) allowing the ‘Members Bar’ an elevated view of the training ground at a similar level to Level 2 at the “G”! I am sure that the building design will cater for staff, players and members when they consider orientation (e.g. player’s facilities don’t need a view as there will only be dog-walkers there when they are not training)!

I think that this is the objective of the plan, players facility right next to the ground and a MFC Member’s Bar/Lounge overlooking the training ground.

Because Gosch’s Paddock is only a wind-swept oval. It doesn’t address bringing all our functions together under one roof nor provide a facility for members!

I think that you are overlooking the fact that there are two aspects to this proposal. Firstly we develop a HQ building with our admin, gym, “DemonShop”, phsios, etc (plus a licensed club facility for Demon members to meet adjacent the MCG)! Secondly we have a training area of a similar size to the “G”, located immediately next door and overlooked by the former. The ground would service most training exercises (or modifications of same) that I have observed at Gosch’s Paddock and (should we want to do full match simulation) Gosch’s Paddock is only a warm-up jog away. We also have Casey at our disposal. Nothing is going to be perfect (except if we get 52 week access to the MCG) however, as Bartlett stresses, this was the option identified as having more positives than other scenarios considered!

What Bartlett said in the paper this morning was encouraging. The idea that there is no fencing proposed will resonate with the local resident dog walkers and, when it is all said and done, if we need to do full match simulation then Gosch’s Paddock is still only a short jog away. Other aspects of training can take place in Yarra Park and you only need one set of goal posts to practice goal kicking. The most influential residential neighbour (Rupert Myer) isn’t effected and it doesn’t hinder his view through to the city! It may well work and they seem to have looked at all aspects before letting it hit the press.

It has been ten days and over 400 Demonland posts since the Hun broke this on the front page. There have been good comments raised in favour and also valid arguments against in support of Gosch’s Paddock as another option! Since it must have been leaked/given to the Hun by the Club, surely it is time for the President to make an announcement (or give us further details) either outlining the Club’s rationale for this proposal or hosing down our expectations?

The trees fronting Wellington Parade are within the rail reservation and most likely self-seeded. As trees go they are not attractive specimens. For some reason, there are seven trees missing from the footpath which Council for some reason hasn’t replaced. Replacing these (after we build our facility) will certainly improve the streetscape from what currently exists.

I cannot believe that you are suggesting we site the venue on the basis that people will “spur of the moment” hop off the train with kids in tow when they see our HQ! I have never met any parent that has hopped off a train with their kids on the basis of noticing a Club building and I would be disappointed if the MFC board in their revenue projections had this as a serious element in their choice of the site. Although it serves less train lines (Jolimont), it also services two busy tram lines and the area is jam-packed at the conclusion of any match. It is also only 100 metres from the ground.