tallstuey...a players role is to fulfill the coaches request to the utmost of his ability..its really that simple.

Dont get all caught up in fairytale stuff. The Player is there at teh bequaest of the club to fulfil the role his is paid to do.

if that is to play "strangely" then thats bloody well what he will do..or lump it..or [censored] off !!

Seems he did..such is life

Oh and ps, when was the last player who walked out of (not was traded by) another AFL club at 23 and said, "yeh, I know you want me to stay but I want to play at the MIGHTY MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB" ?

Now this is the essence of where your head is at.

I understand the desire to see the MFC be a respected footy club that people want to come to.

They'll like us when we win.

We are not attractive for various reasons but the selfless acts of the FD in the last 6 weeks have set us up to become that respected team.

Of course, nothing is certain, but decisions like moving on a slow midfielder that is on the periphery is nothing to be depressed or worried about.

Yes we stuffed it again.

We haven't stuffed anything tall, Tell me this....When did Brock Mclean last play a really Top Class Game That Blew your Mind, Took a game apart....When?? Think about it.

Oh and ps, when was the last player who walked out of (not was traded by) another AFL club at 23 and said, "yeh, I know you want me to stay but I want to play at the MIGHTY MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB" ?

That will come when we are financially sound, with a great training base and regularly in the finals.

Apparently his father has a massive say in where Brock goes and has wanted him to leave the club for the last year and half.

Hmm, if tanking caused him to leave it comes down to:

Pick 2 and Pick 11 or Brock McLean. I know what I'd choose!

Hawthorn traded core players and played inexperienced line-ups expecting to lose and received a priority pick. Carlton were genuinely terrible and the only evidence provided to support claims that they were tanking involved the round 22 game againt us. Of course they didn't want to win and of course they were angling towards the priority throughout the entire second half of the season but at no point did it come close to what we did. Do we all need to sit down and watch the Richmond game again?

I'll repeat again, no-one has even come close to replicating the obvious and calculated attempt to manipulate the priority pick rule as us. My point is simple, we will not know the ramifications for some time yet and supporters of this club shouldn't put their head in the sand and think we're through the worst of it. Sure, as supporters, we're confident we've had to sit throught the last of the engineered losses but we're yet to establish the damage done to the fabric of the club, the relationship the coach has with his players and the mindset of the playing group. I cross my fingers that the damage is minimal.

You are wrong, Carlton had won 4 games by round 10 that year, and did not win another game after that ,in one game they were 8 goals up and lost you have a short memory of what carlton did. And hay the forwards we have, and backman could not win us games when they were playing in there positions,maybe they where playing out of position when were suppey not tanking,if the same thing happen next year and somebody did not kick a goals after the siren and we had won ,people like you would be saying, hay what master stock by the DB. so carlton were not that terribale at all.they wre 4 6 at one stage in that year and trribale sides never get 8 goals in front of under 11's so please check your evidence because tou would lose lawsuits

You are wrong, Carlton had won 4 games by round 10 that year, and did not win another game after that ,in one game they were 8 goals up and lost you have a short memory of what carlton did. And hay the forwards we have, and backman could not win us games when they were playing in there positions,maybe they where playing out of position when were suppey not tanking,if the same thing happen next year and somebody did not kick a goals after the siren and we had won ,people like you would be saying, hay what master stock by the DB. so carlton were not that terribale at all.they wre 4 6 at one stage in that year and trribale sides never get 8 goals in front of under 11's so please check your evidence because tou would lose lawsuits

I was suggesting that when people point to Carlton as tankers they generally highlight the round 22 game. I made it clear that I have no doubt that they tanked. I was trying to stress that we've taken the art of tanking to new levels. Posters on this site take great joy in highighting the negative cultural issues associated with Carlton (Visy corruption, tanking, breaching the salary cap). Well guess what we've been caught cheating the salary cap and now we're viewed as the biggest proponents of tanking going around. The AFL is having to respond to questions because our own former players are venting their frustration. I'm sure the AFL (who are still propping up this club financially) are thrilled to be talking about tanking less than a week after a terrific grand final. I'm not suggesting our actions over the past 4 months haven't given us a genuine crack at a premiership, I'm purely considering the possible negative ramifications. Maybe I should put my head back in the sand and continue to convince myself that Brock is slow and unnecessary, players still respect coaches who make it impossible for them to win games of footy and public perception doesn't matter when you're trying to lure a quality player in the PSD.

Oh and thanks for the lawsuit advice. WTF!

We, as MFC supporters, have got to stop being such self-loathing, pathetic, and neurotic people.

Constantly reflecting on how 'other clubs do it differently,' how 'we were morally questionable' and how 'the media will see our actions.'

I honestly wonder if MFC supporters would prefer to finish 2nd and be morally clean, than deal with a bit of controversy and win a flag.

Is Jack Trengove worth it? I don't know.

But I will tell you this - winning one more game was not worth losing Trengove...

And BTW, we 'won' our PP with a kick after the siren.

Carlton had to take Fev off the ground against Ess, put him into surgery earlier than necessary, retire Matty Lappin in Rd21 (Rd 21 FCS!), and not go near TJ in that infamous mtach.

Do you think Carlton could give a Flying Unicorn Called Kirk?

Doesn't Davey re-signing for 4 years indicate that the players aren't too despondent

about 2009. The sky hasn't fallen in at MFC there isn't a mass walkout the coach hasn't been

sacked. You'd think this joint was richmond with all the fake hysteria

Brock walked or was pushed cause there was no room left for him with 2 more potentially elite mids

coming into the side. And we could get a fairly decent trade for him which we'll use on a KPP.

Tanking is a negative term given to what every side has done to try and rebuild. Playing people out of position

throwing youngsters into the side getting rid of unperforming veterans was all called list management or rebuilding.

Ess, St kilda, coll, haw, rich, fre, carl have all done this over the last decade.

So finally MFC has realised what's good for goose is good for the gander.

Finally we look like we might be uncompromising and building towards a premiership.

Hmm, if tanking caused him to leave it comes down to:

Pick 2 and Pick 11 or Brock McLean. I know what I'd choose!

Exactly - what a lot of nonsense on this post about the "fabric of the club". The Club has come out of this beautifully so far. We have lost McLean, Robbo, Wheels and Wheaters so far who all were clearly good servants of the MFC, perhaps a great servant in Robbo's case. Equally clearly, none of them are crucial to our chances of winning a premiership in the next few years. Picks 2 and 11 on the other hand, who knows, but at least we get to take our chances.

I expected that I'd be seen as a doomsayer but references to "self-loathing" and "fake hysteria" is a little over the top.

The original poster posed a simple question:

"How on earth can you send young men out there who have trained there guts out for months to try and win a game when there is an alternative agenda happening in the coaches box?"

I happened to agree with him.

I've spent my entire posting life on this forum attempting to highlight the positive. I think I have a history of posts that suggests I've always supported the club, it's players, the footy dept and the administration. Something a little bit different happened last year and I'm amazed that so many have managed to happily consume the fact that we've deliberately lost games over 2009. Don't worry, I was one them. Now, I'm simply asking that we stop to consider the possible fallout.

If you were a talented 22 year old looking for a new club would you choose Melbourne?

Would the events of 2009 influence your decision?

If you were already at the club and you looked up to Brock McLean or Russell Robertson as a role model, would your confidence in the football dept be shaken?

If you were a 79 year old diehard supporter and member like my father who has grown up with the pretty simple premise that you "win at all costs", how would the events of 2009 impact on your level of support?

I'm bloody excited by the prospect of Jack Trengove and pick 11 but at the end of the day we're talking about 2 young kids. It wouldn't take too much to go wrong for the expense to be too high.

If you were a talented 22 year old looking for a new club would you choose Melbourne?

Would the events of 2009 influence your decision?

There are several ways to answer this question, I'll give two as examples.

If the question was asked today then the answer perhaps may be positive.

If the question was asked in three years time when players like Scully, Trengove, Jurrah, Watts and Blease are starting to dominate the competition then 2009 will be a murky memory in the minds of most young kids. Hell, most kids these days have difficulties remembering anything older than 10 minutes.

In reality what happened in the last 8 weeks of 2009 will be very quickly forgotten, player managers and parents are more interested in the quality of the organisation that they are sending their kid to. Once we sort out our training facitlies and get our debt back in line we won't be considered an endangered species any more and will be high in the list of clubs to go to once again.

The sky is not falling and I reckon there's been a fair bit of shadow boxing goign on here.

Time is a great healer.

If our picks this year are guns, LJ and Watts etc come good then we will not give a rats about whether we tanked or moved Brock on.

I think the Brock situation will be win/win.

"If you were a talented 22 year old looking for a new club would you choose Melbourne?

Would the events of 2009 influence your decision?"

If I was a modern day professional footballer who doesn't drink much, if at all, monitors my food intake daily, trains for both current and future requirements, etc, I would seek a club that showed a similar level of dedication to attaining the ultimate goal. I would not choose one that baulked when it was crunch time to set itself up for the future.

If you were a 79 year old diehard supporter and member like my father who has grown up with the pretty simple premise that you "win at all costs", how would the events of 2009 impact on your level of support?

We did do what we had to to "win at all costs".

We took short term pain for long term gain.

Winning at all costs means making the hard and sometimes unpopular decisions.

Securing the priority pick was an example of doing what it takes to win at all costs.

If you were a 79 year old diehard supporter and member like my father who has grown up with the pretty simple premise that you "win at all costs", how would the events of 2009 impact on your level of support?

Recruiting has changed a lot during your dads life. My Dad is 74 & we regulairly go to games during the year.

I said to him that 2009 was going to hurt but that we would celebrate after the Draft.

I have almost forgotten Rounds 1-22 2009 already. But i am mighty excited about Trade week.

The Club needed a Massive Clean out & rennovation. This it has done.

Onward & Upward.

Why assume that Brock left purely for the reasons he stated? Personally, I think that you need to entertain the very real possibility that he:

1) Left because he wanted to play for a team he believed would be successful quicker and play in finals sooner.

2) Was approached by Carlton prior to the conclusion of the season (even prior to the beginning).

3) Is just looking for a way to make it seem as though he had to leave MFC rather than wanting to leave.

4) Wanted to go to a club were he could slide back into a mid-field support role, where he can supply the grunt and others supply the pace he lacks.

5) Never really wanted to be at Melbourne but the draft forced him there.

You only have to look at the Gibson situation to see why a player wouldn't want to admit that they just don't want to be at a club. Even the Buckley situation from years ago where his admission that he left Brisbane to play in finals came back to haunt him.

End of the day, I don't think Brock ever really wanted to be at Melbourne. I'm sure he enjoyed his time at the MFC but I always thought it was going to be a case of 'when' does he go (or try to go) to Carlton, rather than 'if'. I just wish he'd been straight about it.

Why assume that Brock left purely for the reasons he stated? Personally, I think that you need to entertain the very real possibility that he:

1) Left because he wanted to play for a team he believed would be successful quicker and play in finals sooner.

2) Was approached by Carlton prior to the conclusion of the season (even prior to the beginning).

3) Is just looking for a way to make it seem as though he had to leave MFC rather than wanting to leave.

4) Wanted to go to a club were he could slide back into a mid-field support role, where he can supply the grunt and others supply the pace he lacks.

5) Never really wanted to be at Melbourne but the draft forced him there.

You only have to look at the Gibson situation to see why a player wouldn't want to admit that they just don't want to be at a club. Even the Buckley situation from years ago where his admission that he left Brisbane to play in finals came back to haunt him.

End of the day, I don't think Brock ever really wanted to be at Melbourne. I'm sure he enjoyed his time at the MFC but I always thought it was going to be a case of 'when' does he go (or try to go) to Carlton, rather than 'if'. I just wish he'd been straight about it.

Not bad for a first post

I would concur with at least 1-4, with 5 haing many qualifiers to it.

Certainly this wasnt a 5 min, 5 day or 5 week deliberation. I too harbour the notion that Brock had begun to get itchy fet the minute his role was dictated by the club ( read Bailey ).. I mean fancy that... a coach wanting to determine the style of play !! lol

I feel there was much largese under Danners that simply isnt tolerated any more. This doesnt suit all players..S.I. L.

Why assume that Brock left purely for the reasons he stated? Personally, I think that you need to entertain the very real possibility that he:

1) Left because he wanted to play for a team he believed would be successful quicker and play in finals sooner.

2) Was approached by Carlton prior to the conclusion of the season (even prior to the beginning).

3) Is just looking for a way to make it seem as though he had to leave MFC rather than wanting to leave.

4) Wanted to go to a club were he could slide back into a mid-field support role, where he can supply the grunt and others supply the pace he lacks.

5) Never really wanted to be at Melbourne but the draft forced him there.

You only have to look at the Gibson situation to see why a player wouldn't want to admit that they just don't want to be at a club. Even the Buckley situation from years ago where his admission that he left Brisbane to play in finals came back to haunt him.

End of the day, I don't think Brock ever really wanted to be at Melbourne. I'm sure he enjoyed his time at the MFC but I always thought it was going to be a case of 'when' does he go (or try to go) to Carlton, rather than 'if'. I just wish he'd been straight about it.

You may be right, but that doesn't explain why he put $10,000 of his own coin in the Debt Demolition Fund.

Mclean deal not finalized yet.

MELBOURNE expects the Brock McLean-for-pick 11 deal to be one of the first completed during this week's trading, despite a late suggestion by Carlton that it would seek an added exchange of picks for the onballer.

Club chief executives, Cameron Schwab and Greg Swann shook hands on it two weeks ago.

On Thursday, Carlton football manager Steven Icke suggested that while the in-principle agreement was enough to get the deal done, the Blues might seek icing on the cake.

It is believed Carlton will try to trade second round draft picks with the Demons, to move up the order, but Melbourne, having had its initial suggestion of McLean and pick 34 for picks 11 and 27 knocked back, will not allow that to happen.

Nothing is finalised til it is. And it cant be til trade week formally opens tomorrow... then it will be. Should go ahead as advertised.

You may be right, but that doesn't explain why he put $10,000 of his own coin in the Debt Demolition Fund.

does it really matter in the end.... thankyou works for me

Carlton are bloody scums though. Yeah True. Big trade week coming up for the Dees.

You may be right, but that doesn't explain why he put $10,000 of his own coin in the Debt Demolition Fund.

I never said he wasn't a decent bloke (and giving Melbourne back $10,000 that they'd paid him is something a decent bloke would do), just that I didn't believe Melbourne was where he really wanted to be.

Absolutely nothing against Brock, nothing at all. Every time he played, he played hard and did his best. However, I do have something against Carlton. Personally, I think it's more likely that Sticks Kernahan will win a singing competition than that Carlton didn't approach Brock during the regular season. That's what I don't like. Remember back to 2007. How many of us didn't hear the rumour that Carlton was chasing Judd well before the deal went through? Of course, Carlton aren't Robinson Crusoe on that one as I think it's a certainty that Hawthorn did the same thing with Gibson this year.