Are you suggesting that it wasn't ordinary when he arrived?

Do I really need to point out the bleeding obvious ? I'm referring to the MFC's initiatives of inclusion when it comes to women. That's it. Nothing more. Just that one point. Which is the topical point that caused this circus. Jim's point.

Kapeesh ?

Don't worry Hannabal's posts are completely irrelevant because he has admitted to having a personal involvement with a former board member - Coglin. He is a "lackey" a "crony" a "minion." He might even be a former board member himself! If I were you I wouldn't bother addressing the substance of his posts, just continue to point this out over and over again. Clearly he has an agenda and everything he says, no matter how factual, is thus invalid.

Such facts might include the level of female representation on the previous board, the pink lady initiative and women in football functions.

Mate you don't impress me at all you seem to think that if you say the same thing over and over again it becomes the truth. Just remember you can get you point across without writing a book just a few carefully chose words will do.

Mick was part of an ongoing problem we have had at Melbourne and he has taken umbrage to this comment by Stynes,; big deal. What would he have done if Jimmy had said that the previous board had turned us it to a financial basket case, would he have tried to clear that up as well, would he have gone off to the HUN?

We had the women on the board and the pink lady initiative, what else, where there other plans in place? What programs were in place to ensure that the players were aware of womens rights, can you point them out?

Try to keep it to half a page and try something new, I get bored reading the same carp over and over again.

Mick knows where I sit and if he wants to discuss this with me I'm more than happy to.

With you all the way RobbieO. The previous board left the club with record debt and a severe image problem (we didn't have one). At the end of the day factions will always argue, as they think they are always right and can do a better job than the others. Totally self serving. The way I see it, you can break it down like this.

A) Did Jim accurately represent the clubs previous record in relation to women in football? NO

B) Was Mick yelling at Jim at 3/4 time the best way to deal with his grievance? NO

C) Did Mick seek any further meeting with Jim before running to the muck rakers at the HUN? NO

D) Did Jim take the opportunity to set the public record straight when the HUN called? NO

Sounds to me like big boys behaving badly. Honestly now, who does this bad behaviour serve? Certainly not the club.....

Factions can fight all they like, the only thing that matters to me is

"LONG LIVE THE MIGHTY MELBOURNE DEMONS!"

hahahahahahahaha WOW, it amazes me how 2 different people can read the same thing and come to two totally different conclusions.

Good luck with your version of events, but as far as I'm concerned fu%& what has been before, because they were an undisputed failure.

I'm concentrating on what we as a club do NOW and I'm pretty happy so far.

Go on boys, back to your axe grinding

Do I really need to point out the bleeding obvious ? I'm referring to the MFC's initiatives of inclusion when it comes to women. That's it. Nothing more. Just that one point. Which is the topical point that caused this circus. Jim's point.

Kapeesh ?

Silence, minion.

Mate you don't impress me at all you seem to think that if you say the same thing over and over again it becomes the truth. Just remember you can get you point across without writing a book just a few carefully chose words will do.

Mick was part of an ongoing problem we have had at Melbourne and he has taken umbrage to this comment by Stynes,; big deal. What would he have done if Jimmy had said that the previous board had turned us it to a financial basket case, would he have tried to clear that up as well, would he have gone off to the HUN?

We had the women on the board and the pink lady initiative, what else, where there other plans in place? What programs were in place to ensure that the players were aware of womens rights, can you point them out?

Try to keep it to half a page and try something new, I get bored reading the same carp over and over again.

Mick knows where I sit and if he wants to discuss this with me I'm more than happy to.

To late Winston. Succinct reply was already made. If you find my posts tiresome then feel free to skip them. I know that there is no chance for you anyway. If you can convince yourself that Mick was part of an ongoing problem of exclusion and ignorance of women in the club, then 2 + 2 = 5 shouldn't be too much of a stretch for you.

edited for accuracy

Thankyou for editing my post for 'accuracy'. If you call yelling at Jim at 3/4 time seeking a meeting, then perhaps we need to asses your level of 'accuracy'. Nowhere does Mick state he sought a secondary meeting with Jim. I would have thought if he had, he would have also complained about that to the HUN.

Interesting side note, I noticed the HUN were very happy to hang Mick out to dry by reporting that he had called into them. If they wanted to be more sympathetic to his cause, they would not have noted that at all.

Do I really need to point out the bleeding obvious ? I'm referring to the MFC's initiatives of inclusion when it comes to women. That's it. Nothing more. Just that one point. Which is the topical point that caused this circus. Jim's point.

Kapeesh ?

Oh I kapeesh alright I also kapeesh that the previous board had very little ground to defend themselves on and Mick is grasping at, possibly, the only bit left.

5 pages of this?

is this for real, maybe a few here need a hobby!

Thankyou for editing my post for 'accuracy'. If you call yelling at Jim at 3/4 time seeking a meeting, then perhaps we need to asses your level of 'accuracy'. Nowhere does Mick state he sought a secondary meeting with Jim. I would have thought if he had, he would have also complained about that to the HUN.

Interesting side note, I noticed the HUN were very happy to hang Mick out to dry by reporting that he had called into them. If they wanted to be more sympathetic to his cause, they would not have noted that at all.

You have no reason to think that Mick was yelling at Jim. Several posters who know Michael personally have come on to say how preposterous Jim's claim of "abuse" is.

The very fact that you think that the onus is on Michael to seek a second meeting shows just how imbalance you are. Michael's one meeting is one more than Jim sought and Jim, despite clearly being the one in the wrong, gave him absolutley nothing.

And I noticed that part about the HUN trying to paint Michael in an unflattering light also. However, it seems that, even with Jimmy's help, the facts just keep getting in the way. Oh well.

To late Winston. Succinct reply was already made. If you find my posts tiresome then feel free to skip them. I know that there is no chance for you anyway. If you can convince yourself that Mick was part of an ongoing problem of exclusion and ignorance of women in the club, then 2 + 2 = 5 shouldn't be too much of a stretch for you.

Even a fool would have realised that I was referring to the overall problems that the previous board left us with; perhaps I overestimated you.

Even a fool would have realised that I was referring to the overall problems that the previous board left us with; perhaps I overestimated you.

No, I knew what you were trying to do - you were tying to change the subject. I just didn't want to let you get away with it.

Even a fool would have realised that I was referring to the overall problems that the previous board left us with; perhaps I overestimated you.

I have to say, you most severely are.

I came to the same realisation not too long ago

No, I knew what you were trying to do - you were tying to change the subject. I just didn't want to let you get away with it.

Jesus are you Yze Magic's dumber brother?

5 pages of this?

is this for real, maybe a few here need a hobby!

We couldn't have done it without your valuable contribution on page 3, mate.

yawn!

Hazy,

please succinctly tell me what the issue is then.

I have actually lost of track of what you think the initial problem is, cos it seems to me like it has evolved.

Back to basics, please.

Jesus are you Yze Magic's dumber brother?

That is now a win confirmed on two fronts. Subject Change and Personal Abuse.

Hazy,

please succinctly tell me what the issue is then.

I have actually lost of track of what you think the initial problem is, cos it seems to me like it has evolved.

Back to basics, please.

The issue:

Just a phone call away from scandal

intersting... your thoughts?

i think it is totally [censored], keep on going jimmy!!! <_<

No, I knew what you were trying to do - you were tying to change the subject. I just didn't want to let you get away with it.

You're nothing if not persistent Hazy.

You're nothing if not persistent Hazy.

So was Simon Godfrey.

That is now a win confirmed on two fronts. Subject Change and Personal Abuse.

You have failed to give a meaningful response to my points (and instead have rambled on) and you have abused me. So going by your logic I win.

The issue:

In your words please. Succintly.

What is the problem here?

Such facts might include the level of female representation on the previous board, the pink lady initiative and women in football functions.

Why were such initiatives deemed neccessary under the old board in the first place? (feel free to disassemble the premise)

You're nothing if not persistent Hazy.

Hazy is obviously connected somehow to the old Board. We could win the next 5 Premierships with Jim as President & Good old Hazy would be looking for Faults.

You speak with a lot of words but they go round in circles.

The old board were a complete Train wreck when they finally handed over, Debts rising daily.

Sporting clubs are always a phone call away from trouble. Just ask any coach or CEO when the phone rings late at night what there first thoughts are.

Jim never stated we were in trouble on this front-merely that we have to remain ready when dealing with a list of Young men.

So was Simon Godfrey.

Leave me out of this

Hazy is obviously connected somehow to the old Board. We could win the next 5 Premierships with Jim as President & Good old Hazy would be looking for Faults.

You speak with a lot of words but they go round in circles.

The old board were a complete Train wreck when they finally handed over, Debts rising daily.

Sporting clubs are always a phone call away from trouble. Just ask any coach or CEO when the phone rings late at night what there first thoughts are.

Jim never stated we were in trouble on this front-merely that we have to remain ready when dealing with a list of Young men.

Even if I was Coglin himself it wouldn't change the fact that Jim said that when he took over the club, it was nuturing an environment that was ingorant of and excluded women.

Bu you just can't face up to this.

If and when you do, you will not be able to face up th the fact that it is a lie.