http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl...2-19742,00.html

HUN article today - also one on captaincy - interviews with Brad Green.

Congratulations to Brad for putting loyalty before the lure of big bucks!

Brad is nice guy also. He deserves the support of all MFC supporters for sticking with the MFC when the possibility of playing finals and chance at a premiership was available to him.

As noted in the article Brad did step up in 2008 and put himself on the line often in 2008. We all need to cheer him loudly in 2009 to show hi we appreciate loyalty at the MFC.

I would also like to see him considered for sole captain (as a 2 to 3 year option) which would give Brocky and some of the other younger candidates more time to consolidate their footy before taking on the captaincy. The Junior/Bruce co-captaincy is a stop gap option at best & they need to show more on field in 2009.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl...2-19742,00.html

I would also like to see him considered for sole captain (as a 2 to 3 year option) which would give Brocky and some of the other younger candidates more time to consolidate their footy before taking on the captaincy. The Junior/Bruce co-captaincy is a stop gap option at best & they need to show more on field in 2009.

I think he deserves our support for his loyalty and his candor on trade week in this article.

But the captaincy is not something that can be won with a good article. If he wins it, it is because his behaviour at training and around the club is one of a leader. Or THE leader.

Personally, I still cannot get past the fact that when he was injured at the start of last season he was voted out of the leadership group because the playing group never saw him. You have to throw yourself into everything at a club if you want to lead it - you can't pick and choose when you are an example to others.

COURAGE -

Plugging holes for Bailey all over the field, he showed a new-found desperation to crash packs in defence while still setting up play downfield.

one year captaincy at most

this is a role that needs to be given to brock

however, good article

Personally, I still cannot get past the fact that when he was injured at the start of last season he was voted out of the leadership group because the playing group never saw him. You have to throw yourself into everything at a club if you want to lead it - you can't pick and choose when you are an example to others.

The issue with Brad Green was that under the new player voting system Green was not voted into and not out of the leadership group. It had nothing to do with his injury. It had more to do with how other players perceived him at the Club as a leader. He is a wonderful bloke but tends to be quiet amongst the players and does not demonstrate the leadership they thought was required. Its a pity because there have been a number of times on the field where Green has lead the way with the hard contest. And just because he might have been injured does not mean he was not visible amongst the players. Then again, the fact they put Yze and Robbo into the leadership team suggested to me that they should have Green there instead.

You also have to consider with a 3-2-1 voting system like this you had 6 or more players new to the playing group who were casting votes (Grimes, Morton, Cheney, Maric, McNamara, Martin.. possibly also Wona, Valenti, etc.) and if Green was not around during preseason due to injury, being one of the less vocal players & one of the less promoted players (like Yze, Robbo, etc.) would have hurt his chances...

And as we know the final vote was very close.

My argument, for why he should not be captain, is that circumstances such as these should not occur for someone of true captain material.

Never the less, Green without a doubt belongs firmly within MFC's leadership group.

And I'm glad we still have him.

(edit: ... although, if we were able to get Lewis Johnston in return I might have a different opinion...)

The issue with Brad Green was that under the new player voting system Green was not voted into and not out of the leadership group. It had nothing to do with his injury. It had more to do with how other players perceived him at the Club as a leader. He is a wonderful bloke but tends to be quiet amongst the players and does not demonstrate the leadership they thought was required. Its a pity because there have been a number of times on the field where Green has lead the way with the hard contest. And just because he might have been injured does not mean he was not visible amongst the players. Then again, the fact they put Yze and Robbo into the leadership team suggested to me that they should have Green there instead.

When Brad was given the opportunity to captain the side in one game in 2007 he did a good job & better than Cam in terms of on field leadership. Brad would be more in the Neitz mould of leader.

Brad was quiet prior to 2008 but this natural disposition is shared by a number of potential leaders in our playing group, including Neita and Yze previously and Junior (quieter than Brad) Flash & Jonesy. Under DB Aaron and Brad at least have begun speaking up more & developing in that aspect.

With the immaturity level of our list, it's beyond me why we're continuing with the policy of the players voting for the leadership group.

I'd imagine that the players are instructed to vote based on certain leadership attributes of possible candidates. If that's the case, surely the football dept. are in the best position to judge these attributes.

If the players are voting without any set criteria, it ends up being a popularity contest.

Either way, the football dept. should be making the decision.

With the immaturity level of our list, it's beyond me why we're continuing with the policy of the players voting for the leadership group.

I'd imagine that the players are instructed to vote based on certain leadership attributes of possible candidates. If that's the case, surely the football dept. are in the best position to judge these attributes.

If the players are voting without any set criteria, it ends up being a popularity contest.

Either way, the football dept. should be making the decision.

They do have set criteria, set by the players themselves in a voting system & guided by leadership consultants Leading Teams

But I do agree that players should spend more time around the playing group before influencing decisions of this ilk.

Maybe remove 1st &/or 2nd year players from the vote.

maybe thats already the case

Brock McLean better be captain next year. A McDonald - Bruce co-captain scenario would sicken me.

If they were to give it to any one other than McLean then Green would have to be it.

The issue with Brad Green was that under the new player voting system Green was not voted into and not out of the leadership group. It had nothing to do with his injury. It had more to do with how other players perceived him at the Club as a leader. He is a wonderful bloke but tends to be quiet amongst the players and does not demonstrate the leadership they thought was required. Its a pity because there have been a number of times on the field where Green has lead the way with the hard contest. And just because he might have been injured does not mean he was not visible amongst the players. Then again, the fact they put Yze and Robbo into the leadership team suggested to me that they should have Green there instead.

On field there is only two choices. Brock and Brad. They are both very good players and they both do the stuff that leaders need to do on field. Brad (I think) would improve with the added pressure of being Captain. Brock still needs to consistently get on the park and I don't think he needs the added pressure.

But Rhino, his perception amongst the players, especially the younger ones, was affect because of his injury.

I believe if he had been injury free and amongst the playing group throughout the off season of next year, he'd have certainly been voted into the leadership group.

Who made the decision to include him mid year? Was that the coaches, or a new vote?

Either way I'd be happy for Brock to take over next year, or for Brad to lead our club for a few years.

We're filling our club with passionate people, and great kids, and I think Brad would be a very good figurehead.

With the immaturity level of our list, it's beyond me why we're continuing with the policy of the players voting for the leadership group.

I'd imagine that the players are instructed to vote based on certain leadership attributes of possible candidates. If that's the case, surely the football dept. are in the best position to judge these attributes.

If the players are voting without any set criteria, it ends up being a popularity contest.

Either way, the football dept. should be making the decision.

i disagree...even though it shouldnt be a popularity contest, u are more likely to get somebody who has the support of their peers, if it is done through a vote.

-the players arent that immature that they can not decide for themselves who they would like to be captain

i believe that everything should be decided purely on the vote in these circumstances

not chosen by the coaching staff

I am not sure what the immaturity of the list has to do with as most of the players would have been deemed adults elsewhere in society. And I dont take number of games or years service. Some players go through their whole career without any clue about leadership

The football department have laid the set criteria by the players are to vote.

By voting for the leaders under the set criteria, the players have a responsibility and accountability to support their leader who in turn have that same responsibility and accountability to lead. The selection are subject to peer review at the half year where those that dont lead are excluded and arising leaders are brought. Very transparent.

And from the voting done by the players I dont think they got it much different to what the football department.

However, it worth noting that at the half year the players had the chance to review the decisions made at the start of the year it is interesting the leadership list changed when it was clear who was leading and who was not.

But Rhino, his perception amongst the players, especially the younger ones, was affect because of his injury.

I believe if he had been injury free and amongst the playing group throughout the off season of next year, he'd have certainly been voted into the leadership group.

Who made the decision to include him mid year? Was that the coaches, or a new vote?

Either way I'd be happy for Brock to take over next year, or for Brad to lead our club for a few years.

We're filling our club with passionate people, and great kids, and I think Brad would be a very good figurehead.

Hotgod, 75% of the list had played with Green for a year or more. Surely they would have assessed Green as a leader or not. And if so their votes should have got him a leadership berth if they deemed him a leader. They did not. It actually was a good lesson for Green.

Rivers has not played for almost 2 years yet he was voted onto the leadership. Now what the difference between Rivers and Green. Leadership qualities.

The players voted mid year and amended the leadership group.

Green will be a good VC. Brock McLean for mine.

I am not sure what the immaturity of the list has to do with as most of the players would have been deemed adults elsewhere in society. And I dont take number of games or years service. Some players go through their whole career without any clue about leadership

The football department have laid the set criteria by the players are to vote.

By voting for the leaders under the set criteria, the players have a responsibility and accountability to support their leader who in turn have that same responsibility and accountability to lead. The selection are subject to peer review at the half year where those that dont lead are excluded and arising leaders are brought. Very transparent.

And from the voting done by the players I dont think they got it much different to what the football department.

However, it worth noting that at the half year the players had the chance to review the decisions made at the start of the year it is interesting the leadership list changed when it was clear who was leading and who was not.

In fact the players set the criteria. Firstly the player group was told to vote on the 3 values they felt the club should stand for.

They then had a subsequent vote on which players best exemplified these values.

The players who scored the highest amount of votes made up the leadership group - as told to me by Sean Wellman early last season.

He said one of the values was 'unity'. He would not say the other 2.

However, it worth noting that at the half year the players had the chance to review the decisions made at the start of the year it is interesting the leadership list changed when it was clear who was leading and who was not.

In other words they got it wrong in the first instance.

A quarter of the list had no experience of the on-field leadership capabilities of the players they were voting for.

In other words they got it wrong in the first instance.

A quarter of the list had no experience of the on-field leadership capabilities of the players they were voting for.

Not really.

In two instances they did with Yze and Robbo. But they corrected that in the mid year. The other issues were about right.

A quarter of the list know alot more about leadership and what makes a leader and made sound decisions.

I am not sure what the immaturity of the list has to do with as most of the players would have been deemed adults elsewhere in society. And I dont take number of games or years service. Some players go through their whole career without any clue about leadership............

Totally agree. TJ would be a good example who we are all familiar with!

The thing that worried me in those two articles in the HUN was the suggestion of co-captains (Bruce and McDonald were the given example). No. No, no, no, no, no. We must select one captain, someone to lead this club and take on the responsibility. And preferably not Bruce or McDonald.

Brock McLean better be captain next year. A McDonald - Bruce co-captain scenario would sicken me.

I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU....why would they even consider co capts??????.. McLean for me as capt with Green as his vcapt.

The thing that worried me in those two articles in the HUN was the suggestion of co-captains (Bruce and McDonald were the given example). No. No, no, no, no, no. We must select one captain, someone to lead this club and take on the responsibility. And preferably not Bruce or McDonald.

Pretty much exactly what i think, co-captains is such a soft option. If it is between these two then so be it but i want them to chose ONE of them.

But Brock gets my vote.

PS. Good on Green for staying true red and blue!

Name the first Melbourne Footballer who took constructive criticism onboard - and then delivered an emphatic answer = Brad Green.