But where they failed on this one is in not sufficiently grilling Scully about his motivations for playing footy and the strength of his desire to play for Melbourne. Clever interrogation and due diligence were not adequately carried out.

On a numero uno draft pick that's a fail of epic proportions.

The fact is D. Martin repaid the faith in the Tiges and shunned GW$ from the get go, whereas our boy and his management team have deadset put us through the wringer.

That's the cold hard reality. It was a massive call and we got it wrong Whoever's in charge needs to be held accountable for it (along with other poor recruiting decisions) ... Cale Morton being the other glaringly obvious one.

Pick 1 and pick 4. That's two gilt-edged, rolled-gold chances Melbourne has stuffed up in an era of AFL footy where the odds are increasingly stacked against us.

Hopefully there's a silver lining in it somewhere but there are no guarantees now.

Some of you need to grow a pair and realize the culture of this footy club has to change from top to bottom (hopefully it's happening now).

We have been second rate in nearly every department for far too long. That includes recruiting!

Absolutely agree with that we simply had to ask the question; if we pick you will you be committed to the Melbourne Football Club and would it be your intention to stay there long term. We knew GWS were in the pipeline and would be looking for recruits so we should have anticipated something like this. Alarm bells would also have rung when we offered Scully a three year contract and he declined.

We criticise the coach and the football department but seem to give the recruiters a free pass. They get paid to do a job and if they, like the coach, don't do it then they should be made to pay for it.

But where they failed on this one is in not sufficiently grilling Scully about his motivations for playing footy and the strength of his desire to play for Melbourne. Clever interrogation and due diligence were not adequately carried out.

On a numero uno draft pick that's a fail of epic proportions.

The fact is D. Martin repaid the faith in the Tiges and shunned GW$ from the get go, whereas our boy and his management team have deadset put us through the wringer.

That's the cold hard reality. It was a massive call and we got it wrong Whoever's in charge needs to be held accountable for it (along with other poor recruiting decisions) ... Cale Morton being the other glaringly obvious one.

Pick 1 and pick 4. That's two gilt-edged, rolled-gold chances Melbourne has stuffed up in an era of AFL footy where the odds are increasingly stacked against us.

Hopefully there's a silver lining in it somewhere but there are no guarantees now.

Some of you need to grow a pair and realize the culture of this footy club has to change from top to bottom (hopefully it's happening now).

We have been second rate in nearly every department for far too long. That includes recruiting!

I have no problem with your views on Scully going or as his ability as a footballer (thus far - I have stated many times - I dont judge 20 year old footballers) but to take a shot at our recruiting of Scully is just tripe. Retrospectiveness at its very worst.

There is not a recruiter on record that did not say Scully would not go number one and would not have taken him for their club.

You could even argue that MFC did its due diligence on Wtts/Nic Nat - equal choices at number one but we went with the local boy to take the go home factor out of the equation.

I think you are allowing your bitterness to cloud your thinking.

Absolutely agree with that we simply had to ask the question; if we pick you will you be committed to the Melbourne Football Club and would it be your intention to stay there long term.

You mean committed as in - " I love coming to work everyday and playing for the football club - I want to be a one club player and envisage that will be the case"

We should have sought answers like that ?

Ummm

I have no problem with your views on Scully going or as his ability as a footballer (thus far - I have stated many times - I dont judge 20 year old footballers) but to take a shot at our recruiting of Scully is just tripe. Retrospectiveness at its very worst.

There is not a recruiter on record that did not say Scully would not go number one and would not have taken him for their club.

You could even argue that MFC did its due diligence on Wtts/Nic Nat - equal choices at number one but we went with the local boy to take the go home factor out of the equation.

I think you are allowing your bitterness to cloud your thinking.

What you call 'restrospectiveness' I call 'performance appraisal'.

All recruiters saying Scully has the talent to go number one is only part of that equation. As RobbieF points out, the other is factoring in the unique GW$ situation and making a hard call on which of Scully or Martin were more likely to stick with us long term.

Logic dictates my thinking, not bitterness (although I like many am quite rightly not happy about it).

What you call 'restrospectiveness' I call 'performance appraisal'.

All recruiters saying Scully has the talent to go number one is only part of that equation. As RobbieF points out, the other is factoring in the unique GW$ situation and making a hard call on which of Scully or Martin were more likely to stick with us long term.

Logic dictates my thinking, not bitterness (although I like many am quite rightly not happy about it).

Yessss....

Because the boards were full of concern that we should have taken Martin instead of Scully because of the looming GWS threat and the very apparent attitude of the kid that when he is offered $1M a year to GWS ( which of course we all knew was going to happen) that he ups and moves interstate !

I am logically also surprised at Hawthorn taking Hodge over Judd until I realised that Hawthorn knew Judd would leave WCE and come back to Carlton after they offered him half of Visy ( such insight !) and how wrong did StKilda get it with Luke Ball at no 2 - even made him Captain - they should have known he was going to the Pies for nothing. And fire all recruiters that let Chris Grant get through to the 90's and Aaron Sandilands as a rookie.

Again i respect your opinion on Scully leaving as you have been nothing but consistent but to try and float the argument that the recruiters got it wrong on Scully with what was available at the time is not your best effort

Yessss....

Because the boards were full of concern that we should have taken Martin instead of Scully because of the looming GWS threat and the very apparent attitude of the kid that when he is offered $1M a year to GWS ( which of course we all knew was going to happen) that he ups and moves interstate !

I am logically also surprised at Hawthorn taking Hodge over Judd until I realised that Hawthorn knew Judd would leave WCE and come back to Carlton after they offered him half of Visy ( such insight !) and how wrong did StKilda get it with Luke Ball at no 2 - even made him Captain - they should have known he was going to the Pies for nothing. And fire all recruiters that let Chris Grant get through to the 90's and Aaron Sandilands as a rookie.

Again i respect your opinion on Scully leaving as you have been nothing but consistent but to try and float the argument that the recruiters got it wrong on Scully with what was available at the time is not your best effort

It doesn't matter that the boards weren't full of concern about Martin/Scully.

What matters is that the recruiting chief should have been. Why? Because Dustin has shown what makes him tick and stuck fat with Richmond early on. And Scully didn't.

It is a unique situation that bears no comparison to any of the examples you have cited.

It's a very simple point to comprehend. And a very hard one to argue against.

Edited August 28, 201114 yr by Range Rover

It doesn't matter that the boards weren't full of concern about Martin/Scully.

What matters is that the recruiting chief should have been. Why? Because Dustin has shown what makes him tick and stuck fat with Richmond early on. And Scully didn't.

It is a unique situation that bears no comparison to any of the examples you have cited.

It's a very simple point to comprehend. And a very hard one to argue against.

Got it right with Trengove, Gysberts and Tapscott though (ironically, for the very reasons they didn't seem to get it right with Scully).

All of this 'We should have picked Martin' talk gives me the sh!ts! Scully and Trengove were ALWAYS going to be Pick's #1 and #2. Whilst Martin in retrospect looks as though he should have been a top-two pick, it just wasn't going to happen at the time because Scullgove were clearly head and shoulders above the rest.

Pre-draft, Scully was considered the best midfielder to have come out of the U18 system since Judd... he was touted as a lock for Pick #1 well over 12mths prior to being drafted, and his performance at his second national carnival did nothing to change that status. Even when he fractured his patella in his final game, it was just considered a minor hiccup and it wasn't going to change that fact that he was going pick #1. He missed Draft Combine, but had he been fit for testing it would have just increased his reputation because he would have dominated in all fitness testing. Kicking test may have found him out a bit, but people knew his kicking wasn't perfect pre-Draft Combine.

We were never going to draft Martin, and if we had we would have been looked at stupidly at the time... although hindsight says otherwise now, but don't write Scully off. If he doesn't end up at GWS (and all indications from HIM says he is undecided), then I'm still happy to have taken him. Get a full pre-season under the belt and he could still become what he was touted as pre-draft.

Yeah, I disagree. My take - rightly or wrongly - is a teenager being offered millions and refusing to sign is destabilizing for the rest of the group. Geelong admitted after the fact that that was the case with Ablett and they're a tougher group than ours. I don't understand his reasons and I've gone from desperately wanting to keep him to not caring. I want players who want to be at the club and are paid according to their ability. Players like Trengove and Watts.

I agree Ned. I don't know whether Scully will stay or not, but on any construction this issue has been very destabilising to the club in the circumstances this year. And he could have sorted it out - but for some reason, Kevin Rudd style, he was doggedly determined to do it all in his own time, rather than consider what might actually be in the best interests of the club and his team-mates. Trengove gets it - and, for that, I love the bloke.

It's a real pity we may have missed out on landing a 10 year plus player with our first pick - but if we get two first rounders in return, I'll be comfortable with that.

I also still feel aggrieved by the result of that Bomber Riley game in the last round of 2007 against Carlton, which resulted in us getting pick 4 (Morton) rather than picks 1 and 2 (Kreuzer and Judd).

Why would you put yourself through a year of scrutiny just to sign with Melbourne 1 day after the season was over. This time next week while the boys are doing mad monday, scully will be doing a press conference in a GWS jumper.

Scully's desire is there and he is playing through the pain of deep bone bruising

So, he is being judged as a flop, based on:

- rumours he will leave for a pot of money that we can't / shouldn't compete with.

- him being underdeveloped physically compared to other players in the same draft class, when we always knew he'd take longer to build his body than the man-children.

And that is "poor recruiting"?

I'm tempted to make a sarcastic comment about the intelligence of one that would make that sort of argument, but I think it speaks for itself.

I'm sorry, was I being unfair?

And to Demons player no less!

For shame!

Yes you were unfair on Moloney, the rest of the players you said i have no problem with

Why would you put yourself through a year of scrutiny just to sign with Melbourne 1 day after the season was over. This time next week while the boys are doing mad monday, scully will be doing a press conference in a GWS jumper.

I don't know... I wouldn't want to put myself through it, but he/his management have decided that leaving contract talks until post-season is what is best. He has said all year that he would wait until after the season, and he is within his rights to do so... even though I believe it has been an unnecessary distraction down at the club. I really doubt that he will be up at Rooty Hill doing a press conferance next Monday though.

Why would you put yourself through a year of scrutiny just to sign with Melbourne 1 day after the season was over. This time next week while the boys are doing mad monday, scully will be doing a press conference in a GWS jumper.

It will be interesting to see how long before hius announcement, irrespective.

As to selections and accountability, it all get s a bit murky.I dont eny the slkectors job. Get a few right theyre heroes...get somme wrong theyre dingbats ( or worse ) You wont get them all right.That however shiouldnt remove any balanced look back at either the process or outcome. We all get ajudged for effort and results. Why would they be any different. I would presume though that it isnt going to take anything anyone here says for them to be self critical. Id imagine theres more thana few D'ohs and Bugger's exclaimed by selctors as they look back. Why did we pick him again ? Howd he slip past ? etc

Over al lI think Predergast and co have done pretty good but there are some lemons amongst them. Was it that they were so easily identified at the time ? maybe not. I dont think any clubgets it all right and were certainly not the exception..

Once youre selction from the "rest of" i.e after all prime candidates have goen then its a bit of a rafffle and weve done prettty well. Weve also go a few early ones wrong ( ish ) but hindsight is unforgiving . Lets hope that as with all these processes theyre refined that we simply get better at it.

As with anything I suppose..get it right its pats on the back, not so right and theres a 'please explain'

Always though, as with anyone at the club..accountability comes with the territory, as it ought.

Cale Morton being the other glaringly obvious one.

Yes, Craig Cameron should definitely be shown the door for that one.

:crickets:

What matters is that the recruiting chief should have been. Why? Because Dustin has shown what makes him tick and stuck fat with Richmond early on. And Scully didn't.

It's a very simple point to comprehend. And a very hard one to argue against.

It's hard to argue with because it's just so outrageously non-sensical. Honesty RR, if you think asking a kid "so are you going to stay with the club no matter what offers come your way?" then there's just no helping you. You're going to get the answer you want to hear, whether it's the truth or not. No 18 year old kid looking to fulfil his lifelong dream is going to say "yeah, I'm just going to sign up with whoever offers me the most money" (and not just from Scully, any kid would say that). Firstly because getting drafted is the most important thing to them, and secondly there's absolutely no way an 18 year old kid has the foresight to know how he's going to feel when he's put in such a compromising position two years down the track.

There's just no way you could screen the difference between Scully and Martin's positions on this kind of matter. If you know of a way then I'm all ears, but just "asking the question" just ain't going to cut it. Chinese water torture perhaps?

I watched Tom play yesterday and for the first time this year I felt he was playing with an intention to build a reputation and legacy at the MFC. The particular moment was when he and green both closed in (at full speed) on a contested ball, which Green ended up with...

So, with no evidence apart from that feeling, I reckon he'll stay.

IMO Tom Scully seems really happy and pumped with our win

and for those people that make assumption that he is gone I'm not being sarcastic.

Yes you were unfair on Moloney, the rest of the players you said i have no problem with

Moloney us a frontrunner.

Loves it when we dominate, doesn't do much when we need him the most.

We needed Tom Scully when we drafted him - such an impressive individual, player and leader.

Were we to know that there would be a chance he would, after seeing the club's issues, leave for GWS?

We still need that strong character. He's 20, out of form, injured, and still contributes to the extent he does.

It wasn't a failed pick at all.

I hope we keep him.

Scully's desire is there and he is playing through the pain of deep bone bruising

Is this based on your observations or something more concrete?

Is this based on your observations or something more concrete?

The deep bone bruising?

Directly out of the mouth of Cameron Schwab yesterday.

Some would choose not to believe him though.

Also said it was the other knee that was the issue, not the one he fractured before being drafted.

So any comparisons to Cooney would be moot at this stage.

It will heal fully, but it just takes quite a bit of time.

He can still play on through the pain, but it'd be considerable.

Edited August 28, 201114 yr by Gareth Keenan

The deep bone bruising?

Directly out of the mouth of Cameron Schwab yesterday.

Some would choose not to believe him though.

Also said it was the other knee that was the issue, not the one he fractured before being drafted.

So any comparisons to Cooney would be moot at this stage.

It will heal fully, but it just takes quite a bit of time.

He can still play on through the pain, but it'd be considerable.

mate have you asked him his opinion about scully's decision?

mate have you asked him his opinion about scully's decision?

Nope.

Moloney us a frontrunner.

Loves it when we dominate, doesn't do much when we need him the most.

Front runner is a harsh assesment, but i can see why you come to the conclusion.

But as far as lacking passion and commitment as you stated, that is completely off the mark