The seeds of yesterday's humiliation

[pitmaster 3,513]

were planted last year when Dean Bailey sacked James McDonald.

Everything started at the centre bounce and apart from some brave stuff from Moloney in the 2nd and 3rd quarters and McKenzie trying hard we were smashed in there. I am trying to understand the gulf between us and them in 2010 and yesterday and thinking about the tackles that didn't stick and the bodies brushed aside. Sure, once the ball was in their forward zone we could not work it out, but it was their near total dominance in the middle that determined the result.

Key outs for us compared to last year are Jamar, James Mc, Bruce (much as I hate to admit it) and Brad Green (I will explain in a minute).

Macca was a physically mature, mentally strong man for the engine room. He was in career best form and should have had another year, no question. There would have been less ragdoll treatment had he been available and more resistance from us.

Bruce would have put team mates under the hammer yesterday, but he would also have negated an opponent and won a fair bit of his own ball. His departure, while not lamented as much as the former skipper's, was influenced by the treatment of McDonald.

And having disposed of McDonald, Green was elevated to skipper. Green also was in career best form last year but the captaincy seems to have taken a toll. Dumping McDonald has cost us two mature players who were at the peak of their powers, plus Bruce.

Bailey has expressed regret at the way McDonald was treated, but when Dean moves on I reckon he will have come to regret dumping him in 2010. We were not ready to lose him.

[dazzledavey36 54,343]

if bruce was playing strauss or tapscott wouldn't be playing games this year. we made the right choice there.

but i do agree with you about mcdonald massive mistake! we had no leaders out there yesterday and his leadership for these young kids would have been very important..

[Theo 272]

were planted last year when Dean Bailey sacked James McDonald.

Everything started at the centre bounce and apart from some brave stuff from Moloney in the 2nd and 3rd quarters and McKenzie trying hard we were smashed in there. I am trying to understand the gulf between us and them in 2010 and yesterday and thinking about the tackles that didn't stick and the bodies brushed aside. Sure, once the ball was in their forward zone we could not work it out, but it was their near total dominance in the middle that determined the result.

Key outs for us compared to last year are Jamar, James Mc, Bruce (much as I hate to admit it) and Brad Green (I will explain in a minute).

Macca was a physically mature, mentally strong man for the engine room. He was in career best form and should have had another year, no question. There would have been less ragdoll treatment had he been available and more resistance from us.

Bruce would have put team mates under the hammer yesterday, but he would also have negated an opponent and won a fair bit of his own ball. His departure, while not lamented as much as the former skipper's, was influenced by the treatment of McDonald.

And having disposed of McDonald, Green was elevated to skipper. Green also was in career best form last year but the captaincy seems to have taken a toll. Dumping McDonald has cost us two mature players who were at the peak of their powers, plus Bruce.

Bailey has expressed regret at the way McDonald was treated, but when Dean moves on I reckon he will have come to regret dumping him in 2010. We were not ready to lose him.

McDonald was let go because of list management. We had few players coming out of cntract last year and he was sacrificed. List management is becoming an increasing problem because this year we only have Warnock, Maric, Wona, Martin, Morton, Sylvia, Gawn, Fitzpatrick, Scully out of contract. The first 3 are the only ones likely to be axed which may not be ideal. Most clubs have a third of their list out of contract every year. We have put ourselves in a very difficult position yet again.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Who would you have out of the team for Junior to be playing?

Keeping Junior would have provided some leadership this year, but I'm doubtful if the results would have been any different, maybe the margin, but only slightly.

I don't think the situation was handled well, but the desired result was the correct one (ie Junior not playing this year). He was slowing down, and it was getting harder and harder for his body to handle the demands of todays football. I strongly believe that he would've been a liability this year rather than an asset, and C Bruce was in the same boat.

[pitmaster 3,513]

Who would you have out of the team for Junior to be playing?

Keeping Junior would have provided some leadership this year, but I'm doubtful if the results would have been any different, maybe the margin, but only slightly.

I don't think the situation was handled well, but the desired result was the correct one (ie Junior not playing this year). He was slowing down, and it was getting harder and harder for his body to handle the demands of todays football. I strongly believe that he would've been a liability this year rather than an asset, and C Bruce was in the same boat.

I am not making a case for retaining Bruce but trying to understand the difference between us and the Pies 2010 and yesterday. Physical maturity is a part of it. You're right - it would only be changing the margin - or perhaps avoiding such a big backward step.

We could still be putting games into Evans, Nicholson, Tapscott had we retained Junior, just not so often. And that's not such a bad thing - West Coast have a terrific mix of senior and novice players right now.

[MikeAlphaTango 150]

The gulf is that Collingwood have lost only 2 games since we last encountered them last year this includes winning the 2010 premiership.

[Choko 493]

were planted last year when Dean Bailey sacked James McDonald.

Everything started at the centre bounce and apart from some brave stuff from Moloney in the 2nd and 3rd quarters and McKenzie trying hard we were smashed in there. I am trying to understand the gulf between us and them in 2010 and yesterday and thinking about the tackles that didn't stick and the bodies brushed aside. Sure, once the ball was in their forward zone we could not work it out, but it was their near total dominance in the middle that determined the result.

Key outs for us compared to last year are Jamar, James Mc, Bruce (much as I hate to admit it) and Brad Green (I will explain in a minute).

Macca was a physically mature, mentally strong man for the engine room. He was in career best form and should have had another year, no question. There would have been less ragdoll treatment had he been available and more resistance from us.

Bruce would have put team mates under the hammer yesterday, but he would also have negated an opponent and won a fair bit of his own ball. His departure, while not lamented as much as the former skipper's, was influenced by the treatment of McDonald.

And having disposed of McDonald, Green was elevated to skipper. Green also was in career best form last year but the captaincy seems to have taken a toll. Dumping McDonald has cost us two mature players who were at the peak of their powers, plus Bruce.

Bailey has expressed regret at the way McDonald was treated, but when Dean moves on I reckon he will have come to regret dumping him in 2010. We were not ready to lose him.

You're absolutely right about James. And if he plays a role in Scully going to GWS, the irony would not be lost on me.

There's a lit of posters here with their heads in the sand about the impact of the way we managed our legendary captain. It's got nothing to do with list management, although I think we definitely could and should have retained for a year. It's about the way we embarrassed a captain, hue unprofessional it was and the ongoing impact on morale and leadership.

[The Chazz 4,077]

I am not making a case for retaining Bruce but trying to understand the difference between us and the Pies 2010 and yesterday. Physical maturity is a part of it. You're right - it would only be changing the margin - or perhaps avoiding such a big backward step.

We could still be putting games into Evans, Nicholson, Tapscott had we retained Junior, just not so often. And that's not such a bad thing - West Coast have a terrific mix of senior and novice players right now.

West Coast do have a good mix, but their senior players are a lot better than ours, and that wouldn't have changed if Junior was playing. While he was a very good leader, his ability was limited.

We are looking for a quick fix if we think Junior would've saved us in "those" games this year, but it would've been like trying to fix a broken let with a band-aid.

[P-man 13,366]

Regardless of his potential impact on the game, I still say the way J Mac was treated stinks to high heaven. It will forever be a blight on the club in my eyes. I think Bruce and Miller were justifiable as both were/are well past their best and made room for other important youngsters, but J Mac was in near career best form and just happened to be the bloody captain of the club.

[Little Richard 6,262]

Regardless of his potential impact on the game, I still say the way J Mac was treated stinks to high heaven. It will forever be a blight on the club in my eyes. I think Bruce and Miller were justifiable as both were/are well past their best and made room for other important youngsters, but J Mac was in near career best form and just happened to be the bloody captain of the club.

Totally agree, they just went too far.

[Guest hangon007]

West Coast do have a good mix, but their senior players are a lot better than ours

Not many people where saying that 11 rounds ago. Its amazing what you can do in 11 rounds of AFL football.

[Choko 493]

Regardless of his potential impact on the game, I still say the way J Mac was treated stinks to high heaven. It will forever be a blight on the club in my eyes. I think Bruce and Miller were justifiable as both were/are well past their best and made room for other important youngsters, but J Mac was in near career best form and just happened to be the bloody captain of the club.

Yep. To the club's credit, they have apologised.

[Guest 36DD]

Regardless of his potential impact on the game, I still say the way J Mac was treated stinks to high heaven. It will forever be a blight on the club in my eyes. I think Bruce and Miller were justifiable as both were/are well past their best and made room for other important youngsters, but J Mac was in near career best form and just happened to be the bloody captain of the club.

I was disappointed to lose Junior last year but hindsight is a wonderful thing, something which the football administration is not able to take advantage of.

Yes Junior was playing great footy however, the 6 odd weeks it took him to get over a hammy would have worried Bailey and Co. Also, playing him would have limited the exposure to Gysberts, McKenzie et al.

We can sit back in judgement with the benefit of hindsight but I cant recall a huge outcry when he was let go, just disappointment over the handling of it.

[H_T 3,043]

I was a big fan of Junior. Early to mid 2010 I was thinking he would go another year on his form, I wasn't the only one. Even he may have thought it possible. But then his injury happened - which left him out for something like 6 weeks - at 34 his body was telling him something, it was taking a long time to recover from. Weigh this up with the list we have and the fact they were drafting four more at the time. The FD and anyone of reasonable judgement wanted to make sure with many 1st, 2nd year players - that they were going to get games into them. What people must also recall and remember from a leadership perspective at the time, Cameron Bruce was still considered to be a Melbourne player.

So as a football club perspective and list management point-of-view, it was a more proactive decision to nudge Junior into retirement because the nature of the list and not holding back the youngsters was considered significantly important to development and the fact that a stalwart at 35 years of age entering his 15th season with the club, he posed a risk of delaying development.

When Bruce walked, the club may have opted differently in hindsight.

[Sir Why You Little 36,989]

I was disappointed to lose Junior last year but hindsight is a wonderful thing, something which the football administration is not able to take advantage of.

Yes Junior was playing great footy however, the 6 odd weeks it took him to get over a hammy would have worried Bailey and Co. Also, playing him would have limited the exposure to Gysberts, McKenzie et al.

We can sit back in judgement with the benefit of hindsight but I cant recall a huge outcry when he was let go, just disappointment over the handling of it.

Exactly as i see it. Junior would have struggled playing the game in 2011. He was 35 don't forget.

The right decision was made.

[Choko 493]

Exactly as i see it. Junior would have struggled playing the game in 2011. He was 35 don't forget.

The right decision was made.

I think the decision was wrong, but that's besides the point. It was the manner in which it was handled that left a poor taste, morale problems, leadership void, etc....

[John Dee 445]

were planted last year when Dean Bailey sacked James McDonald.

FFS build a bridge, and get over it.

Jmac was one of my favourite demons of recent times but at 34, going on 35, and with a soft-tissue injuries catching up with him was never going to be a great force this year.

Edited June 14, 2011 by John Dee

[Sir Why You Little 36,989]

I think the decision was wrong, but that's besides the point. It was the manner in which it was handled that left a poor taste, morale problems, leadership void, etc....

I see a lot of people saying this, but i don't know how else it could have been done. Junior was retired by the club in time for the draft so we could recruit young players...

How else do you retire someone?

[Choko 493]

I see a lot of people saying this, but i don't know how else it could have been done. Junior was retired by the club in time for the draft so we could recruit young players...

How else do you retire someone?

Well, firstly, the club apologised for the manner in which it handled the issue. So they see how else it could have been done.

But I'll have a go.

I am of the belief that a captain has earned the right to make his own decision about retirement. By being captain, we are saying he is the ultimate man for selflessly promoting team over self. Therefore, I don't think it was or should have been the club's call.

But even if you disagree with that, as I appreciate many would, warning and giving appropriate time and consultation to James that notwithstanding his good form, this would be his final year. We ahve full time list manager, player liaison, all that crap.... it's the least we should have done for a captain.

He is [censored] at the club, and rightly so. Other players were and are too.

[Sir Why You Little 36,989]

Well, firstly, the club apologised for the manner in which it handled the issue. So they see how else it could have been done.

But I'll have a go.

I am of the belief that a captain has earned the right to make his own decision about retirement. By being captain, we are saying he is the ultimate man for selflessly promoting team over self. Therefore, I don't think it was or should have been the club's call.

But even if you disagree with that, as I appreciate many would, warning and giving appropriate time and consultation to James that notwithstanding his good form, this would be his final year. We ahve full time list manager, player liaison, all that crap.... it's the least we should have done for a captain.

He is [censored] at the club, and rightly so. Other players were and are too.

He also took 6-7 weeks to recover from a Hammy injury at the age of 34

The Club had too make a decision as to whether he would be productive on the field in 2011.

Captain or not, the Club pays the wages & it had to make a tough decision.

That same club would have been laughed at if Junior pulled another hammy in round 2 this year.

The Game is faster with less rotations in 2011.

I still cannot see what the club could have done differently aside from a chocolate cake and group hugs.

[Choko 493]

He also took 6-7 weeks to recover from a Hammy injury at the age of 34

The Club had too make a decision as to whether he would be productive on the field in 2011.

Captain or not, the Club pays the wages & it had to make a tough decision.

That same club would have been laughed at if Junior pulled another hammy in round 2 this year.

The Game is faster with less rotations in 2011.

I still cannot see what the club could have done differently aside from a chocolate cake and group hugs.

I'm not surprised you can't see it.

[Dr. Mubutu 831]

I was a big fan of Junior. Early to mid 2010 I was thinking he would go another year on his form, I wasn't the only one. Even he may have thought it possible. But then his injury happened - which left him out for something like 6 weeks - at 34 his body was telling him something, it was taking a long time to recover from. Weigh this up with the list we have and the fact they were drafting four more at the time. The FD and anyone of reasonable judgement wanted to make sure with many 1st, 2nd year players - that they were going to get games into them. What people must also recall and remember from a leadership perspective at the time, Cameron Bruce was still considered to be a Melbourne player.

So as a football club perspective and list management point-of-view, it was a more proactive decision to nudge Junior into retirement because the nature of the list and not holding back the youngsters was considered significantly important to development and the fact that a stalwart at 35 years of age entering his 15th season with the club, he posed a risk of delaying development.

When Bruce walked, the club may have opted differently in hindsight.

Well put, HT.

[Guest Artie Bucco]

Right decision.

Wrong way to handle it.

What's done is done.

I'm also not exactly sure that having Junior play this year would've helped matters much.

Plus one of the kids would be getting less time at AFL level, holding back their development (the reason why it was the right decision).

It may not have been McKenzie or Gysberts missing out, but Bail, or Evans or Nicholson. Strauss may not be getting the chance he is now.

And Bruce may not have left either (his leaving is a good thing).

[Sir Why You Little 36,989]

I'm not surprised you can't see it.

Can't see what? The MFC is not a half way house....Maybe that is part of the problem of the last 47 years.

Junior was very well looked after at this club over a long period.

His being out there yesterday would have changed nothing.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Well, firstly, the club apologised for the manner in which it handled the issue. So they see how else it could have been done.

But I'll have a go.

I am of the belief that a captain has earned the right to make his own decision about retirement. By being captain, we are saying he is the ultimate man for selflessly promoting team over self. Therefore, I don't think it was or should have been the club's call.

But even if you disagree with that, as I appreciate many would, warning and giving appropriate time and consultation to James that notwithstanding his good form, this would be his final year. We ahve full time list manager, player liaison, all that crap.... it's the least we should have done for a captain.

He is [censored] at the club, and rightly so. Other players were and are too.

Source? If you're going to use that as your arguement, you probably should back it up.

My source (an ex-Dee who also had the shoulder tap in recent years) told me that Junior was disappointed initially, but it didn't take him long to realise it was the right decision.

The only thing that is an issue is the way it was done. Fair enough, Junior should've been the one that made the decision, but not if he was going to wait until the end of 2011. The decision had to be made at the end of 2010.