The role of football director is an important role. I would hope the club were doing everything in its power to replace Leoncelli. Maybe there wasnt a good candidate which forced Jims and McLardy hand to step in for the time they did. Definately not a good situation but id rather wait 6 months to get someone good, than just employ anyone.

From where i stand (from the outside looking in) both Jim and McLardy are good men, highly respected and intelligent. Im sure they didnt like the situation either.

Its all speculation but so are alot of posts.

are you saying that in all of Melbourne we couldn't find one person to replace Leoncelli in a reasonable timeframe? That's a worry.

are you saying "good men, highly respected and intelligent" don't make mistakes?

Look, like I said I'm not in favour of dwelling on these issues or having a witch-hunt but your arguments just don't stand up or are not relevant.

Agree on the speculation. There may will be rare occassions. This was not one of them.

Unless you're fully cognisant of all of the facts and circumstances you shouldn't be so definitive. I don't think I'm going out on a limb when I say you weren't.

I'll back McLardy's judgment.

are you saying that in all of Melbourne we couldn't find one person to replace Leoncelli in a reasonable timeframe? That's a worry.

are you saying "good men, highly respected and intelligent" don't make mistakes?

Look, like I said I'm not in favour of dwelling on these issues or having a witch-hunt but your arguments just don't stand up or are not relevant.

Daisy im not saying good men dont make mistakes, everyone does. Many organisations at some point cant find suitable candidates for positions, thats why you see adverts in the job sections re adverstising many times over stating previous applicatants need not apply. Recruitment can take many months sometimes. I know this from personal experience. It is relevant especially for specialised or professional jobs

Failure to replace Leoncelli's role was two fold.

[1] There was no other board member with football skills to step in temporarily except Jim. Jim already had president responsibilities, quite apart from his illness. The board allowing Jim to take on this additional role was plain stupid regardless of his good intentions.

[2] It took too long to find a replacement. Even then it seems that Healy can only provide limited time (?) hence the change in role of Craig. I have no problem with Craig having this change of role but not if it is at the expense of a Director being restricted time-wise. It potentially leaves Craig compromised if he is seen to be doing part of the job of a Director.

I know there are excuses, some of which you mention, but nevertheless they are excuses and don't hide the fact that this was a failure of the Board which shouldn't have happened.

It was probably also a failure which was a key element to the organisational 'problems' escalating as they did

That's as much as I want to say. I'd prefer to put it behind us at this time in light of the recent massive reorganisations.

I agree with most of what your saying daisy. But the club has rectified these problems and is moving forward. I reserve judgement on Greg Healy, the guy has just started.

This issue has been done to death

I'll back McLardy's judgment.

Be careful. Your constant support of Neeld, McLardy and all things MFC etc will brand you an apologist!!

I call it as I see it, always have. And I'll not join the pack but usually only debate something when I'm in the minority.

FWIW, McLardy said he became aware of "trouble" wihen Green gave his On The Couch interview. McLardy should never have approached Green, he should have approached senior management - Schwab, Connolly, Green, Harrington, Bailey.

There were lots of mistakes around W186 and I think lessons will have been learned. But as stakeholders we need to be aware of the mistakes and be vigilant in ensuring they don't happen again. One strike doesn't mean you're out, it means one strike. Many seemed to have missed that strike and that was the point I wanted to initially make.

I agree with most of what your saying daisy. But the club has rectified these problems and is moving forward. I reserve judgement on Greg Healy, the guy has just started.

This issue has been done to death

agreed

OK lets recognise these mistakes and put them behind us. I think the board now recognise they were mistakes.

For christsakes bring on the footy

Agree on both points especially the last one!

Unless you're fully cognisant of all of the facts and circumstances you shouldn't be so definitive. I don't think I'm going out on a limb when I say you weren't.

I'll back McLardy's judgment.

Lke Fan said, I dont believe that McLardy should have gone around management to the players on the issue. Mclardy will have some high points at MFC. IMO that was not one of them.

One thing I forgot to mention last week.

There was not one pink MFC top in sight.

Thank god we may have put that sorry lot behind us.

Edited February 6, 201213 yr by old dee

I still think the club would be in a worse position now if McClardy had NOT spoken to Brad Green & other leaders when he did. What was he supposed to do sit on his hands wit head in the aand, in honour of protocol?? This club has done too much of that over the last 5 decades. IMO.

I still think the club would be in a worse position now if McClardy had NOT spoken to Brad Green & other leaders when he did. What was he supposed to do sit on his hands wit head in the aand, in honour of protocol?? This club has done too much of that over the last 5 decades. IMO.

There's a persuasive argument that McLardy interviewing the team leaders in that week provided the distraction and destabilisation that caused 186. What else was significantly different in the lead up? Now maybe you can mount an argument that 186 was the debacle we had to have.

There's a persuasive argument that McLardy interviewing the team leaders in that week provided the distraction and destabilisation that caused 186. What else was significantly different in the lead up? Now maybe you can mount an argument that 186 was the debacle we had to have.

You may well be right 55, although i think the fire had been burning for most of 2011. And i have already said earlier that 186 was probably the best thing to happen. It was SO BAD that actions had to be taken immediately & not put off till later. If McClardly had not spoken to people we may still have the same coach and disfunctional communication between FD & board today.

IMO McClardy took drastic action when we had drastic times. From the moment he did, the club has stiffened up and gone forward.

Has anyone thought the Cats were a better team on the day. 186 points better

Apologies for interrupting.

But, it's not McClardy, or McClardly.

There maybe too many C's and L's, it's understandable and it could be confusing for some. Bit it's McLardy. One small "c" and just the one "L"..

He's the MFC President.

Trengove has one "r" too, while we're at it.

There's a persuasive argument that McLardy interviewing the team leaders in that week provided the distraction and destabilisation that caused 186. What else was significantly different in the lead up? Now maybe you can mount an argument that 186 was the debacle we had to have.

I think the answer to both questions is yes.

He inadvertently brought the disaster and we had to have it as it brought a release to the boiling pot.

Then we swiftly took it off the hot plate and put half in the sink...

One thing - don't go to the player mid-week with out a coach or coaches unless those coaches are the issue. I couldn't think of anything worse for the preparation of a team, especially one led so poorly, than to talk to the board about grievances days before a match.

Has anyone thought the Cats were a better team on the day. 186 points better

Further to the above point. The pies, reigning premiers, 2nd best team last year were beaten by 100 points a month later by the Cats. Maguire didnt speak to Maxwell prior or after, Pert and Malthouse were getting along. Their board wasnt in turmoil. It happens.

Yes it was an embarassing loss and our players layed down and whimpered. They are at fault for not having the guts to stand up to one of the best teams in history.

I just wanna forget it happened

Has anyone thought the Cats were a better team on the day. 186 points better

Of course they were a better team.

At cat land they have been for most of the last 20 years

but 30 goals!

I cannot swallow that.

GCS did not come close to that margin and please do not tell me we are worse than them.

Something happened over the couple of weeks before that game.

We will probably never know what but something was a miss.

Edited February 6, 201213 yr by old dee

Further to the above point. The pies, reigning premiers, 2nd best team last year were beaten by 100 points a month later by the Cats. Maguire didnt speak to Maxwell prior or after, Pert and Malthouse were getting along. Their board wasnt in turmoil. It happens.

Yes it was an embarassing loss and our players layed down and whimpered. They are at fault for not having the guts to stand up to one of the best teams in history.

I just wanna forget it happened

Unfortunately you will never be able to.

It is in our history like the largest margin in a loosing GF.

The MFC have some of the best recorded winning times.

Unfortunately we also have some of the most disappointing at the other end.

The 22 that ran out that day will have to wear that result for the rest of their days.

And we as supporters will carry it to the grave.

We have a slight prayer that this year GWS may take a couple of our titles .

I am about to start praying as soon as the typing stops!

Edited February 6, 201213 yr by old dee

Unfortunately you will never be able to.

It is in our history like the largest margin in a loosing GF.

2nd largest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_AFL_Grand_Final

Old, you are right its inprinted in the mind. I just think that 22 players have got away with their performance too much. The coach (who had to go) and the off field antics are played up too much. Yes ppl have to take responsibilty, but im impressed how the club has learnt from this experience with the extensive changes that have been made.

The board do need to answer questions to its stakeholders, but actions have answered many questions. Time to move on IMO.

186. Never heard of it - i wish ;-)

2nd largest.

http://en.wikipedia....AFL_Grand_Final

Yes sorry mate we did manage to shed that one.

I just wanna forget it happened

I certainly never want to forget 186. The MFC should use it as a point of unacceptability..similiar to how John Kennedy used the 1950's beltings by Melbourne against Hawthorn to inspire Kennedy's Commandoes to push harder.

Do not ever forget 186. Use the experience wisely. Both the onfield & offield.

Yes sorry mate we did manage to shed that one.

yeh better get that one right hehe

He inadvertently brought the disaster and we had to have it as it brought a release to the boiling pot.

Then we swiftly took it off the hot plate and put half in the sink...

One thing - don't go to the player mid-week with out a coach or coaches unless those coaches are the issue. I couldn't think of anything worse for the preparation of a team, especially one led so poorly, than to talk to the board about grievances days before a match.

You are totally missing the point. It seems clear from what I read that the players had been whining for some time about C Schwab interfering in the footy department. Don didn't bring anything on. He was tryingto find out why the players were 'up in arms'.

The phrase 'lunatics running the asylum' comes to mind...

Roost It, do you have any idea what Don McLardy has done for the Club over the last three years? When Jim took over the Presidency, he brought McLardy with him into the Vice-President's position. Do you think he would have brought him on board if he didn't have complete faith in his abilities. While Jim has been dealing with his health issues, Don McLardy has been the president, and has overseen the changes that everyone has been lauding over the last four months. Now, when Jim has made the decision to focus on his health and his family, there seems to be a number of people calling for McLardy's head. Unbelievable!

You are so correct and at all times since Big Jim got cancer Don has basically run the show. He, however, was let down badly by CS & the management of the football department. He will do a fantastic job. However, he has agreed with the massive injection of money to the FD.It is now up to Neeld, Craig, Misson & co- to develop and conquer.