Jimmy on the radio

[Ghost 0]

Just thought I'd mention the interview our Prez Stynes did on 3AW Sunday in case people didn't hear it while it's still in the memory.

Was a great interview. The highlight probably being when Jim swore.

He was asked by Tony Shaw if Bails would still be our coach when the ship turns. Jim said, and I quote "I don't give a sh#% about profile." referring to Baileys low profile.

Of course Caro Wilson was offended and said Jim surely could have thought of a better word to use.

Jim apologised.

Wilson asked about the priority picks situation and whether winning five games would be a mistake.

Jim danced around the question and pretty much gave the standard it's out of our hands, we'll win as many as we win answer. He also called our win over Carlton in round 22 2007 a 'dubious' victory. He also said that we possibly should have received a early priority pick last season since our total number of wins over the previous two seasons was 8, an average of 4 a season rather than being 5 and 3 wins respectively.

He was asked about our fixture and our number of Sunday games and said he believed every club should get at least one Friday night game and a minimum number of Saturday games. He said it is the big issue for the club going forward.

He also said he had only recently become comfortable with being the President and said he had spent many sleepless nights early on, sometimes getting up at 3am with ideas and issues buzzing around his head.

That's about it. I've probably forgotten bits but that was the gist of it.

Another good interview with Jim.

[cooko 124]

haha thats awesome! Big Jim.. he has already improved the club since his new roll and i think there will be a lot more to come! Jim = GOD!!

nice recap by the way!

[Guest Cleveland_Steamer]

Caroline Wilson pretending to be offended by the S word.

Cant she just [censored] off already?

[wisedog 332]

Remember on Footy Classified last year when Caroline Wilson said one of the teams looked "absolutely rooted"

[45HG 1,539]

His backing of the AFL and their "management" of umpiring really underlined the troubles of being a poor club that relies heavily on the AFL.

[Nasher 33,246]

At risk of sounding precious, it's a tad unprofessional to swear on air when there's a plethora of other words he could've used. I know it's a very minor quibble, but seriously, even Malcolm Blight's "rat's tossbag" would've been better. It's not that hard.

Anyway, thanks for the rundown.

[mo64 5,280]

He was asked by Tony Shaw if Bails would still be our coach when the ship turns. Jim said, and I quote "I don't give a sh#% about profile." referring to Baileys low profile.

So he didn't answer the question.

In a TV interview he was asked when he expected Melbourne to be playing in finals, and his response was 3-5 years. I was dumbfounded by that response. Is he going to perservere with Bailey until we make the finals?

[rpfc 27,693]

His backing of the AFL and their "management" of umpiring really underlined the troubles of being a poor club that relies heavily on the AFL.

You're presuming there is something inherently wrong with umpiring.

This is a nothing argument created by the Collingwood hierarchy to deflect blame onto a witless foil - the umpires.

Kennett was arrogant and patronising and deserved to pay a fine.

We should aim to get to Rugby Unions' level of respect for those who officiate - and you're not going to get there with the comments that Kennett and Malthouse have given.

[Rogue 585]

In a TV interview he was asked when he expected Melbourne to be playing in finals, and his response was 3-5 years. I was dumbfounded by that response.

Stynes used the 3-5 years line a couple of times last year and that timeline fits with my expectation.

When do you expect Melbourne to be playing finals?

[dazzledavey36 49,840]

caro wilson should go suck a fat one! seriously does she ever occure to her that nobody and i mean nobody cares wat she says?

[Guest JACKtheRIPPER]

caro wilson should go suck a fat one! seriously does she ever occure to her that nobody and i mean nobody cares wat she says?

CLASSIC, , :lol:

[rusty_kingswood 0]

So he didn't answer the question.

In a TV interview he was asked when he expected Melbourne to be playing in finals, and his response was 3-5 years. I was dumbfounded by that response. Is he going to perservere with Bailey until we make the finals?

At this stage. WHy wouldnt he?

[rusty_kingswood 0]

caro wilson should go suck a fat one! seriously does she ever occure to her that nobody and i mean nobody cares wat she says?

Thats a sweeping generalization if ive ever heard one.

I respect what Caro says. I dont always agree with it, but she does a very tough job in mans game, and she does quite well.

Shes got alot of good thigns to say about this club to might I add.

[Deeoldfart 7,864]

Thats a sweeping generalization if ive ever heard one.

I respect what Caro says. I dont always agree with it, but she does a very tough job in mans game, and she does quite well.

Shes got alot of good thigns to say about this club to might I add.

Agree strongly. She's one of the top bracket of AFL journos IMO.

[Sir Why You Little 35,364]

His backing of the AFL and their "management" of umpiring really underlined the troubles of being a poor club that relies heavily on the AFL.

Totally Disagree with tha statement. Without Umpires there is no game..

My only Gripe with the umpires is that i hear them telling players what to do e.g. When the ball is in a pack they Yell "Knock it out, knock it out" That is not their job.

The umps job is to adjudicate on what the players do, and either let the play flow or pay a free if an infringement is seen.

[Paul Gardner 6]

So he didn't answer the question.

In a TV interview he was asked when he expected Melbourne to be playing in finals, and his response was 3-5 years. I was dumbfounded by that response. Is he going to perservere with Bailey until we make the finals?

What is it that you don't get, we won't be in Finals games till at least 2011, unless half the competition falls over.

[45HG 1,539]

You're presuming there is something inherently wrong with umpiring.

This is a nothing argument created by the Collingwood hierarchy to deflect blame onto a witless foil - the umpires.

Kennett was arrogant and patronising and deserved to pay a fine.

We should aim to get to Rugby Unions' level of respect for those who officiate - and you're not going to get there with the comments that Kennett and Malthouse have given.

I personally disagree.

I feel Kennett's comments were directed at the state of umpiring rather than at the inidividuals who adjudicate the rules - i.e. he was aiming his comments at the AFL forcing the umpires to pay rubbish free kicks that are often very incosistent (for instance, what the bloody hell is going on with the 50 metres penalty for holding someone after they get rid of it? It gets paid probably 1 every 4 times, the other three times the umpires pay a down the field free kick).

The AFL has brought this criticism on itself. If it doesn't want its rules to be challenged, it should stop bloody changing them. The more they tinker and change, the more people get angry and start pointing the finger.

No offence but comparing AFL umpires to Rugby Union umpires is almost impossible. Rugby Union umpires adjudicate a sport with minimal rule changes and are instructed to use only players numbers and shirt colours when talking to the players - they deserve respect because that is what they demand. AFL umpires are unnecessarily "miked" (sp) and instructed to adjudicate a set of rules that seem to change each week whilst calling players by their not only their names, but their nicknames! How can an official demand respect when they are calling players by their affectionate name?

[rpfc 27,693]

I personally disagree.

I feel Kennett's comments were directed at the state of umpiring rather than at the inidividuals who adjudicate the rules - i.e. he was aiming his comments at the AFL forcing the umpires to pay rubbish free kicks that are often very incosistent (for instance, what the bloody hell is going on with the 50 metres penalty for holding someone after they get rid of it? It gets paid probably 1 every 4 times, the other three times the umpires pay a down the field free kick).

The AFL has brought this criticism on itself. If it doesn't want its rules to be challenged, it should stop bloody changing them. The more they tinker and change, the more people get angry and start pointing the finger.

No offence but comparing AFL umpires to Rugby Union umpires is almost impossible. Rugby Union umpires adjudicate a sport with minimal rule changes and are instructed to use only players numbers and shirt colours when talking to the players - they deserve respect because that is what they demand. AFL umpires are unnecessarily "miked" (sp) and instructed to adjudicate a set of rules that seem to change each week whilst calling players by their not only their names, but their nicknames! How can an official demand respect when they are calling players by their affectionate name?

Don't mistake his holier-than-thou reaction to the fine, and is after-the-fact reasons for his comments as anything other than a politician doing what they do best: obfuscating and confusing the truth.

He said that some of the umpires thought that they were bigger than the game and his proof was the fact that they are miked up so everyone can hear their thoughts.

That is a long way from blaming the AFL for numerous rule changes.

And officials are officials, and respect is respect - their universal.

[45HG 1,539]

I don't think you can compare AFL umpires with Union refs - especially by simply stating respect is respect.

Moving beyond what Kennett said, what's your position on what I just wrote?

[rpfc 27,693]

I don't think you can compare AFL umpires with Union refs - especially by simply stating respect is respect.

Moving beyond what Kennett said, what's your position on what I just wrote?

Yeah, they should leave the rules alone for a couple of years. Your argument is fine and valid, but Kennett just jumped on your bandwagon to make himself the victim and have all of you tbecome his proxies. Don't let him do it.

The umpires are still the excuse of the lazy and the dim-witted.

Umpirng has been a subjective exercise since its inception, there are going to be incosistencies.

[Al`s DEMONS 0]

Stynes used the 3-5 years line a couple of times last year and that timeline fits with my expectation.

When do you expect Melbourne to be playing finals?

2011 we will scape into 8`th

[Sir Why You Little 35,364]

Yeah, they should leave the rules alone for a couple of years. Your argument is fine and valid, but Kennett just jumped on your bandwagon to make himself the victim and have all of you tbecome his proxies. Don't let him do it.

The umpires are still the excuse of the lazy and the dim-witted.

Umpirng has been a subjective exercise since its inception, there are going to be incosistencies.

I agree, i just don't like hearing them tell players what to do in a passage of play. That is wrong & not there job.

[Carn dees 108]

2011 we will scape into 8`th

Im hoping that aswell.

Given How tight it is ussually from 6-10th im hoping were in amongst competing for a spot.

[Guest hangon007]

Stynes used the 3-5 years line a couple of times last year and that timeline fits with my expectation.

When do you expect Melbourne to be playing finals?

Rule number 1 - Always under promise and over deliver!

IMHO "normally" his time-line would seem appropriate for a President to openly voice on radio.

However, IMHO when the Gold Coast enter the comp dont under estimate the possibility of an overall leveling effect. Hopefully pushing this time-line forward.