Yep I have. We'll I think it is safe to say that we're farkkked!!!

Does very one have short memories, it was not gutnick who started all the debt, when gabriel szondy got reed of gutnick we had no debt, for three years under szondy we went from 500k in the black to 5m in the red, one of the main reasons for this is for three years when the speacel fund that is avalible for under preforming clubs, from the afl which was 1 m a year the bulldogs said thankyou we will take it, then North said thank you, but szondy said no we dont need it, we are just doing fine thank you and all the waile we wree losing 1.5 m a year. i am sick and tied of everyone blaming gutnick how many other people have given the club 3 m.everyone forgets about szondy i dont know why he put as in all this debt just because of his own pride in rejecting the money.

Now I know your poor quality of posts is because you're lazy, not because English is your 8th language. Too lazy to proof read and too lazy to read in th eposts in full that you're responding to.

Reread my post and answer the question of who introduced Szondy & co onto the board.

One of the things that Gutnick promised to bring to Melbourne was skill and expertise to the board, but all he succeeded in doing was to split the club into two. Back stabbing and infighting was his legacy and his arrogance and petulance was the beginning of our misery.

Oh, and one more thing, he didn't give the club $3m, get your facts right.

Yep I have. We'll I think it is safe to say that we're farkkked!!!

Then put in 2 million from handouts that you left out: 700,000 profit

Cheers Vince, I was under the impression that this place is about passionate Melbourne supporters sharing thier views, regardless of thier english ability.

No. Nope. Pretty sure it isn't. If you come on here to say ANYTHING you have to make your posts easy enough to read that we can understand your point, otherwise you create clutter and the site fails. We can all handle typos, and the odd spelling error... in fact as a footy crowd we should expect a LOT of them, but if enough people come on here without writing properly, the football discussion will deteriorate and visitors will cease to visit and post.

Does very one have short memories, it was not gutnick who started all the debt, when gabriel szondy got reed of gutnick we had no debt, for three years under szondy we went from 500k in the black to 5m in the red, one of the main reasons for this is for three years when the speacel fund that is avalible for under preforming clubs, from the afl which was 1 m a year the bulldogs said thankyou we will take it, then North said thank you, but szondy said no we dont need it, we are just doing fine thank you and all the waile we wree losing 1.5 m a year. i am sick and tied of everyone blaming gutnick how many other people have given the club 3 m.everyone forgets about szondy i dont know why he put as in all this debt just because of his own pride in rejecting the money.

No-one on here has forgotten about Szondy... just as no-one has forgotten about Woey.

There are topics on here that people are so tired of going over, that have created so much tension that we simply don't want to waste any more of our lives on them.

Then put in 2 million from handouts that you left out: 700,000 profit

There lies the problem!

We need to be self sufficient going forward.

There lies the problem!

We need to be self sufficient going forward.

Well when we are playing good, top 4 quality football i think gate receipts can increase by 2million +.

No-one on here has forgotten about Szondy... just as no-one has forgotten about Woey.

There are topics on here that people are so tired of going over, that have created so much tension that we simply don't want to waste any more of our lives on them.

concise pertinent summation

At least we don't have to pay out Travis in 2009. Come 2010 and we can wipe our hands of Carroll too.

concise pertinent summation

careful using wording like that, chances are it'll go over a lot of heads on this thread.

... and seriously, if you are unable to structure a sentence coherently with half decent spelling & grammar, what chance have you of understanding our replies?

Sheer laziness & ignorance.

Sorry to go back off topic, but it took me a good 5 minutes to decipher that first post, which is entirely avoidable.

so hes ignorant cause he cant spell but hes your mate if he buys a membership not everyone is as articulate as the lord king shaft go demons

People also don't realise that the MCC is not giving us 1 Mil in cash it includes cheap rent on office space amongst other things

so hes ignorant cause he cant spell but hes your mate if he buys a membership not everyone is as articulate as the lord king shaft go demons

See now, that may as well have been Greek.

I had to go over it three times to figure out exactly what your point was. How hard is it to look over what you posted and use the key to the right of the 'M' key?

so hes ignorant cause he cant spell but hes your mate if he buys a membership not everyone is as articulate as the lord king shaft go demons

Well... spelling errors, in my book, are completely understandable... I was talking more of the fact he's ignorant of proper punctuation. As you seem to be.

Or is it just lazy? Because its one of the two.

A little bit of effort makes it a lot easier for everyone. I wouldn't have even opened this thread, had the title not been ridiculously confusing.

And yes, he is my mate if he buys a membership - I usually challenge my mates to be the best they can be, as they do for me.

Back on topic, with some punctuation, please?

deleted

and by the way if the title is so confusing dont read it shaft

careful using wording like that, chances are it'll go over a lot of heads on this thread.

... and seriously, if you are unable to structure a sentence coherently with half decent spelling & grammar, what chance have you of understanding our replies?

Sheer laziness & ignorance.

Sorry to go back off topic, but it took me a good 5 minutes to decipher that first post, which is entirely avoidable.

Deleted.

Or is it just lazy? Because its one of the two.

It's ... Dr. Grammar.

Get this thread back on track guys or it will be closed.

Fan

Get this thread back on track guys or it will be closed.

Fan

just close it then @#$$#$

Given that:

* the Melbourne Rectangular Stadium is not conducive to an AFL environment (although recognising that there will be elite facilities there in the way of gym, pool etc) and that the players will have to use Gosch's Paddock for on-field training

* there would be substantial rental costs associated with occupancy at the MRS

* the MRS doesn't have sufficient facilities to accommodate MFC admin staff, who would have to be accommodated at the G

* the G would come at a cost (albeit not as high as MRS) to accommodate MFC's footy dept, and the players will still have to use Gosch's Paddock

is there energy (on this site anyway) for the footy dept to be based at Casey Fields while retaining the admin/Board etc at the G?

There would be substantial recurrent savings, MFC would cement even more a relationship with the Casey area and ultimately when the club is then able to get through its current financial difficulties, develop a more elite training complex at Casey Fields.

is there energy (on this site anyway) for the footy dept to be based at Casey Fields while retaining the admin/Board etc at the G?

casey scorp, I agree with all of your points

Having been to Casey Fields and marveling in what is, and what will be, I think the club has a massive amount to gain by training there all year round. From an injury point of view we are no longer training on rock hard "public" grounds in summer and winter training would have continuance of venue and we could focus our training facilities and energies in the one location.

Gosh's paddock as a training venue does not tick the same training boxes that Casey does, but maybe there is more than just the training aspect to it. Maybe they don't want the players too far from the MCG for 12 months of the year as we could lose what little connection to the MCC we have left

There would be substantial recurrent savings, MFC would cement even more a relationship with the Casey area and ultimately when the club is then able to get through its current financial difficulties, develop a more elite training complex at Casey Fields.

Casey Scorp you are talking real sense. I can't understand in this day and age how a club can operate like we do let alone could be looking at having seperate training and admin facilities for the long term. Take aside the financials for a minute. It makes sense to have all facilities football club requires under one roof. I can't think of another side in the AFL that has/had this setup except for fitzroy. Anyone suggesting - be it by the club or other wanting to have admin etc at our spiritual home at the g and training facilities elsewhere is talking nosense IMO.

We as a club need to come to the realisation that the MCG is no longer our home, spiritual home yes but operation home no. The sooner the MFC sign up to casey as a perm training facility the better, why they are not looking at basing the whole show out there is beyond me and talking about the MCG. So from an operational reason there is no sense not making this move, further to this there would financil reasons not only the ongoing lease costs but having all admin and support staff under 1 roof can lead to effeciency/productivity improvements that will translate into bottom line cost reductions. I believe if we take a long term deal with the MCC and splinter the club for the future a big step backward will have been taken.

Couldn't disagree more Monty, the club is obviously working hard at reestablishing our relationship with the MCC. I'd much rather we went down that path first. If we can get cheap rent and train at gosh's paddock during the season it may be as cheap as Casey. At this stage that should be our goal with Casey as a summer training venue.

MCC members who are dees fans need to make their voice heard, if they vote as a block they could have a real effect. We need to show the MCC that we could be good for them. Having a functioning football club living and breathing inside the G, with it's history on display can only help the tours the G has. We need to go home.

Answering the first post, we are certainly still in a very precarious position. I firmly believe that it's so bad that one false venture could prove to be a fatal one. In saying that i see a lot more hope compared to where we were last year, and a lot more supporters are willing to pledged their support financially. There's no doubt that the most important thing we need in the next 2 months is a major sponsor, otherwise we will be severely rationing what little we've got, and that can only lead to more mis-management both on and off the field. The amount of money we lost this year is a very worrying situation, but there were many extraordinary costs that are very unlikely to happen again this year (eg. 2 x CEO Pay-outs, TJ, Carroll etc). Not to mention in the last couple of years we have had a pretty crappy run with injuries, perhaps finally we'll catch a break.

Guess what i'm say is that it's OK for you to have these concerns, but if you would like to help in making this club viable it's up to all of us to try to get more members on board then ever before.

On Casey vs MCG precinct, i've got to admit i'm torn. I guess at this stage i see this summer movement into Casey as a trail run of sorts, we have already found the area to be MUCH better than what we've had in the past but can we afford to abandon our physical link to the MCG. Of all the things that i love about this club, having the MCG as our home is right up the top of the list and i know you're saying that we'd still play there but still being near it when we train i still see as an important link. However, that is an emotional reasoning, and thinking with the brain and not the heart i actually feel that is quite possible in the not too distant future for us to establish Casey as our permanent base much the same way that Hawthorn have done with Waverly. It makes sense in many ways, and while i don't think it would be popular initially, i get the feeling it might be for the best in the long run.

Just one question, is Junction oval to continue being our winter training ground?

There are some other factors which are in play here as well....

As Casey Scorp has noted, the costs of the Olympic Park proposal is extortionate for what we get. Especially when it couldn't house our current admin staff. So it would seem Jimmy's Board is trying to work out what is best.....perhaps footy dept at OLP and admin at MCG?

While I am a convert to the Casey option, it isn't up and running yet. We are to have offices built on site for the footy department and that will take time. So I'm guessing that post summer, we will return to the Junction oval, and then next year....who knows at the moment?

The other thing to keep in mind is a sideline that was told to me some time ago. And that is that Journalists are a lazy bunch. They go for the easy story they are all based in the city precinct. So if you were one of them and had to get a story for tomorrows paper or tonights news where would you go?......Gee Collingwood is just down the road, not 5 minutes drive. You can see the problem if we were to move lock, stock and barrel to Casey, no matter how attractive it might seem.

Since "air time" and sponsorship are the biggest earners for the club, the importance of this is not to be overlooked.