Tom Scully

[Guest hangon007]

Exactly. Tom has the power to stop the whole circus right now.

But he won't. Hence, he's continuing to diminish the MFC.

Rubbish. You are diminishing the MFC.

[PaulRB 6,048]

Maybe then you will only ever have yourself to blame ... but if you want to blame Tom fine ... if that makes you feel better fine.

PS IMHO the MFC are prepared to show some compassion. We are all not the same.

What I feel is always my issue, problem. I don't blame Tom however as the protagonist in this saga with the power he has to take responsibility for the results of his decisions/tactics... It's not about making me feel better, but my communicating to you why this situation sucks and is humiliating for the MFC (whom I am emotionally attached to).

PS IMHO the MFC are putting a brave face on a crap position in which they have few options but to suck it up. Indeed.

[rpfc 27,663]

Exactly. Tom has the power to stop the whole circus right now.

But he won't. Hence, he's continuing to diminish the MFC.

Thst was not my point. My point is that you crucifying Tom over what GWS does is unfair as he is an MFC player, and his links with GWS is unproven - if he stays your criticism would be completely unfounded.

As for whether he signs now - as an MFC member I would like him to decide now, but if I were his advisor I would tell him to stick to what he has said all along and not bow to media pressure - because that is all it is.

We cringe when we see Trengove asked the question over and over again.

But that is hardly diminishing the club.

That is being far too precious about contract negotiations.

I ddin't know we were in such a pathetic state to be diminished by having to wait until September to try and re-sign a player...

Edited July 29, 2011 by rpfc

[Guest hangon007]

What I feel is always my issue, problem. I don't blame Tom however as the protagonist in this saga with the power he has to take responsibility for the results of his decisions/tactics... It's not about making me feel better, but my communicating to you why this situation sucks and is humiliating for the MFC (whom I am emotionally attached to).

PS IMHO the MFC are putting a brave face on a crap position in which they have few options but to suck it up. Indeed.

I have this funny feeling that the MFC might come out of this whole saga very, very well ... assuming people open their eyes & ears. Assuming supporters stop listening to the media & starting listening to our football club, start listening to our players, start respecting our players and start showing them compassion to make the "correct" decision in their own time.

Edited July 29, 2011 by hangon007

[nutbean 8,837]

I hear you .... thank the lord for the media. It acts as "their facts" finding mission. I'm off to spin some articles now ...

PS ... Its not a "kicker" ... the media where spun these to suit the GC17. ssssshhhhh ... I didn't tell you that.

PSS ... After the event you will never get all the "facts" ... History is 98% of the time written by the winner and its spun to suit them.

I understand fully why RR says what he says, I understand fully why many hold the opinions they do. But such is life ... we are all different.

Now I am in 100% agreement.

[PaulRB 6,048]

Chicken and egg questions.

Do teams in which a player is publicly questioning their commitment to their team (for an entire season) achieve success?

Are teams likely to play better or worse when all the players are committed and united (in the team)?

You may not see the Tom saga as "hardly diminishing the club" but in a footy world consisting of generating team intensity and commitment, one percenters, etc.. I disagree with you.

[Guest hangon007]

We cringe when we see Trengove asked the question over and over again.

No some of us dont. You always know your "real" mates when things are tough. Maybe one day Tom can repay the favour .... B)

[Guest hangon007]

Chicken and egg questions.

Do teams in which a player is publicly questioning their commitment to their team (for an entire season) achieve success?

Are teams likely to play better or worse when all the players are committed and united (in the team)?

You may not see the Tom saga as "hardly diminishing the club" but in a footy world consisting of generating team intensity and commitment, one percenters, etc.. I disagree with you.

Bazinga ... but it goes both ways. We too have a responsibility.

However, if it makes you feel any better blame Tom, blame Velocity, blame the AFL, blame our football department, blame the media ... blame who ever you damn well want.

Edited July 29, 2011 by hangon007

[Guest hangon007]

Thst was not my point. My point is that you crucifying Tom over what GWS does is unfair as he is an MFC player, and his links with GWS is unproven - if he stays your criticism would be completely unfounded.

As for whether he signs now - as an MFC member I would like him to decide now, but if I were his advisor I would tell him to stick to what he has said all along and not bow to media pressure - because that is all it is.

We cringe when we see Trengove asked the question over and over again.

But that is hardly diminishing the club.

That is being far too precious about contract negotiations.

I ddin't know we were in such a pathetic state to be diminished by having to wait until September to try and re-sign a player...

Think you are making a "mini-recovery" inside here ... but this thread is not where your REAL problems sits.

No, no my friend you have way, way bigger fish to fry.

[rpfc 27,663]

Chicken and egg questions.

Do teams in which a player is publicly questioning their commitment to their team (for an entire season) achieve success?

Are teams likely to play better or worse when all the players are committed and united (in the team)?

You may not see the Tom saga as "hardly diminishing the club" but in a footy world consisting of generating team intensity and commitment, one percenters, etc.. I disagree with you.

Green, Davey, Rivers, Moloney, and Sylvia will appreciate another excuse for their pathetic leadership and the pathetic performances of the team over the course of the season.

You say Scully is being a distraction for our team, I say our team should be too busy with bigger issues to worry about a few questions here and there.

[QueenC 74]

And do you think Folau knows anything?

Not about too much of anything to be honest.....

[QueenC 74]

I think those who think Tom has acted well (in regard to the MFC) should read Giant Inroads.

How can Tom think that having Folau and GWS use his name (while a player for the MFC) to promote GWS is acting with the intergity we all would like to think Tom has?

At the very least Tom should have had his management ask GWS to cease gloating about his recruitment until he "makes up his mind"...

It's funny this is brought up, as it was in yesterdays Daily Telegraph.....

And it is a puff piece with nothing of note, because there is nothing of note. GWS has had no impact in Sydney's west other than amusement factor.

The four league clubs mentioned, while they aren't having great years on the field (Parra are killing me), they are still the power base and nothing the AFL is doing is going to change that.

I live in the north west and my dad works in Penrith (one of the clubs mentioned), and does a lot of work for the local junior leagues (which are massive) and they aren't losing kids

(or teens or young adults) who want to play AFL, they aren't losing money to GWS sponsors and the Panthers still dominate the town both financially and with playing stocks.

I read the piece and while the GWS will have some initial curiosity factor I have always said that it will never dominate in the west of Sydney.

As for using Tom's name, well we are all too aware that he is a target of the Giants, and there is an apparent contract on the table so there is a definite potential for Foloau to be playing with him,

and thus he seems to have every right to state that that excites him going forward, especially given there isn't much else to get excited about.

But I don't see Tom anywhere in the article.

Edited July 29, 2011 by QueenC

[PaulRB 6,048]

Bazinga ... but it goes both ways. We too have a responsibility.

However, if it makes you feel any better blame Tom, blame Velocity, blame the AFL, blame our football department, blame the media ... blame who ever you damn well want.

What responsibilities are "we" (MFC or MFC supporters) not fulfilling in regard to Tom?

Don't understand why you think blaming others would make me feel better. Thats just weird and perhaps your projection...

[PaulRB 6,048]

Green, Davey, Rivers, Moloney, and Sylvia will appreciate another excuse for their pathetic leadership and the pathetic performances of the team over the course of the season.

You say Scully is being a distraction for our team, I say our team should be too busy with bigger issues to worry about a few questions here and there.

Red herrings to bring others into this.

A "1 percenter" means there can be 100 reasons for failure/under performance. My point was that as the MFC tries to address these 1 percenters, the distraction of the TS saga will be on the list (with many other 1 percenter...).

[Range Rover 1,935]

Blucher was having a discussion with Brad Hardie on 6PR, that is where that 'one week' came from.

Hardie mentioned that he thought it wouldn't be too long after the season for a decision to be made. Blucher agreed. Hardie mentioned 'one week,' Blucher said something along the lines of 'yeah, a couple of weeks, one week, in that timeframe.'

I guess it is up to the individual to determine how long isn't a suspiciously short time, how long it takes to make this kicnd of decision, and how much one wants to read into the offhand comments of Tom's manager...

Don't try and water it down Rpfc.

Hardie clearly asked if one week was enough time to make the "decision" and Blucher agreed that it was.

It's more than a 'suspiciously short time'. It's unmitigated bulltish. Period.

Blucher also said he wouldn't be revealing the contents of the GWS offer until after the home away season had finished.

Because Tom was 'too busy training'. Again, bulltish.

The whole emergence of the player manager was a farce from start to finish. "We approached GWS to make us an offer". Give me a break!!

Smokescreens, red herrings and flat out garbage. An insult to every Demon supporter's intelligence. Everyone except you, so it has seemed.

And more lately we hear about the Scully camp's (yes that is exactly what they are) concern about Junior McDonald's departure and turmoil within the club's admin.

Enough already!!

We know why he's going ... .$$$$$$$$$$$$ !!!

End of story.

Edited July 29, 2011 by Range Rover

[beelzebub 22,604]

ah yes...more smoke and more mirrors. . , just without the artistry of Copperfield alas.

[rpfc 27,663]

Don't try and water it down Rpfc.

Hardie clearly asked if one week was enough time to make the "decision" and Blucher agreed that it was.

It's more than a 'suspiciously short time'. It's unmitigated bulltish. Period.

Blucher also said he wouldn't be revealing the contents of the GWS offer until after the home away season had finished.

Because Tom was 'too busy training'. Again, bulltish.

The whole emergence of the player manager was a farce from start to finish. "We approached GWS to make us an offer". Give me a break!!

Smokescreens, red herrings and flat out garbage. An insult to every Demon supporter's intelligence. Everyone except you, so it has seemed.

And more lately we hear about the Scully camp's (yes that is exactly what they are) concern about Junior McDonald's departure and turmoil within the club's admin.

Enough already!!

We know why he's going ... .$$$$$$$$$$$$ !!!

End of story.

There is no need to 'water down' that 'one week' quote.

lol

As you agreed - Hardie was the one to mention it in the first place...

And reading an enormous amount into it. It's amazing how much ssome can read into Blucher's comments, and how little into Scully's.

And we don't 'know' much at all. That is why we are constantly debating the merits of rumours and the word of a Demon.

ah yes...more smoke and more mirrors. . , just without the artistry of Copperfield alas.

No, not more smoke.

People are just repeating the smoke the swear they saw weeks ago.

[rpfc 27,663]

Red herrings to bring others into this.

Red herring?

I could say the 'this is a distraction' point is a red herring...

A "1 percenter" means there can be 100 reasons for failure/under performance. My point was that as the MFC tries to address these 1 percenters, the distraction of the TS saga will be on the list (with many other 1 percenter...).

Yeah, and my point is that whatever percentage effect the Tom Scully Saga © is causing, it is dwarfed by the actual and real issues that the club and team has to face.

The Tom Scully Saga © will be over by October, our other issues will still be around...

Edited July 29, 2011 by rpfc

[e25 5]

It's utter rubbish that the Scully "situation" is a "distraction" for the team, and detrimental to their performance.

Is the Malthouse "situation" or the Thomas "situation" a "distraction" to Collingwood? What if they go and win the flag, was it a "distraction" then?

Or is that they are mentally strong enough to cope with such "distractions"?

Because then the Scully "distraction" is not the real problem - it is that we are mentally weak.

If you buy all this "distraction" crapola.

This is just a group of hacks, clutching at straws to make excuses for our poor performances, and preferring to find a scapegoat they hope we can chase out of town, as if we never wanted him in the first place.

Pathetic.

[Guest hangon007]

There is no need to 'water down' that 'one week' quote.

lol

As you agreed - Hardie was the one to mention it in the first place...

And reading an enormous amount into it. It's amazing how much ssome can read into Blucher's comments, and how little into Scully's.

And we don't 'know' much at all. That is why we are constantly debating the merits of rumours and the word of a Demon.

No, not more smoke.

People are just repeating the smoke the swear they saw weeks ago.

I take that back your old nemesis is back .... hehehe. You only have to kick the can & out they come. Pull the strings, do another media interview and their paranoia sets in.

Mate its over for you ... you will never convince them. Great fight, however you were beat before you even started.

PS I should add lets just hope Tom character kicks in ... and he stays a demon. That is your only hope. B)

Edited July 29, 2011 by hangon007

[PaulRB 6,048]

Red herring?

I could say the 'this is a distraction' point is a red herring...

Yeah, and my point is that whatever percentage effect the Tom Scully Saga © is causing, it is dwarfed by the actual and real issues that the club and team has to face.

The Tom Scully Saga © will be over by October, our other issues will still be around...

Oh my apologies. I thought I was on the Tom Scully thread.

[Guest hangon007]

Oh my apologies. I thought I was on the Tom Scully thread.

You are ... but maybe it goes far deeper than that. But then its easier just to talk about the ..... $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Guest hangon007]

We know why he's going ... .$$$$$$$$$$$$ !!!

End of story.

Funny would you play for the money? B) Lets recall what you said.

[Guest hangon007]

Red herring?

I could say the 'this is a distraction' point is a red herring...

Yeah, and my point is that whatever percentage effect the Tom Scully Saga © is causing, it is dwarfed by the actual and real issues that the club and team has to face.

The Tom Scully Saga © will be over by October, our other issues will still be around...

hahahahaha ... good luck with that one. You only have to release another "media" article than you've got no chance. B)

Edited July 29, 2011 by hangon007

[rpfc 27,663]

Oh my apologies. I thought I was on the Tom Scully thread.

I am assuming you are being sarcastic.

You are the one bringing the rest of the team as being distracted - and the club 'diminished' - not me.

It is an absolute cop-out to say that the Tom Scully Saga © is distracting this poorly led team.

Another excuse for this team is the last thing they need.