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.

How so?

We don't know what McLardy said and how he said it.

Was the playing group so mentally weak that it was incapable of handling a board member interviewing team leaders?

What about the media speculation about the board being on the brink of renewing Bailey's contract?

It seems to me that it's equally plausible (or even more so) that the game was the players' reaction to that news more than anything else. If there's a connect between what McLardy did and the board's change of heart about Bailey then we can all thank McLardy for saving us all - even if it was for the wrong reasons (which I'm not prepared to concede yet).

How so?

We don't know what McLardy said and how he said it.

Was the playing group so mentally weak that it was incapable of handling a board member interviewing team leaders?

What about the media speculation about the board being on the brink of renewing Bailey's contract?

It seems to me that it's equally plausible (or even more so) that the game was the players' reaction to that news more than anything else. If there's a connect between what McLardy did and the board's change of heart about Bailey then we can all thank McLardy for saving us all - even if it was for the wrong reasons (which I'm not prepared to concede yet).

All reports are that the players liked working with Bailey - it's most likely that they were not upset by the news he would be re-appointed. Nope, I like my explanation a fair bit better thanks. And yes it does point to mental weakness in our leadership group - I think that's agreed.

All reports are that the players liked working with Bailey - it's most likely that they were not upset by the news he would be re-appointed. Nope, I like my explanation a fair bit better thanks. And yes it does point to mental weakness in our leadership group - I think that's agreed.

Now, let's get this right.

The players liked working with Bailey so much that they responded to news of his impending reappointment by putting in the most insipid performance in the history of the modern game?

And you like your explanation a "fair bit better"?

Wow.

By much do you reckon they might have lost if perchance, the players disliked Bailey and discovered he was about to be reappointed?

I don't think we're really equipped to know the truth about W186 because there's so much that's happened that's simply not in the public domain.

Perhaps one day we'll know more about the week's intrigue and then we'll be in a better position to pass judgement about what happened and who should be held to blame.

I guess nobody at the AGM asked what we intend to do with the compo picks..?

I guess nobody at the AGM asked what we intend to do with the compo picks..?

NO!

You would have got a meaningless reply based on who knows at this point who will be in the draft.

Who knows what our position in the draft will be etc.

Ask JC but I doubt he knows at this point.

The club doesn't have a recruitment manager ATM so pretty hard to ask that question.

The club doesn't have a recruitment manager ATM so pretty hard to ask that question.

Even if we did, he wouldn't know now.

Well the club has to decide in the next month & a half so I'd hope they have an idea.

I reckon Timmy Harrington and Mark Neeld have already decided what/when the picks will be used.

Well the club has to decide in the next month & a half so I'd hope they have an idea.

Only if they want to use them this year.

So they only need to have an idea of what they're going to do with them if they're only going to use them this year??? Really....

The club doesn't have a recruitment manager ATM so pretty hard to ask that question.

The recruitment manager doesn't work in isolation. List management and the FD/coach would have a big, I would imagine bigger, say in when we use those picks.

The recruitment manager doesn't work in isolation. List management and the FD/coach would have a big, I would imagine bigger, say in when we use those picks.

Yes. However you can't really make an informed judgement without trusted analysis & data of what your going to potentially use them on. My point remains that the club doesn't have a recruitment manager hence what basis are they going to make an informed decision?

The information they have at hand comes from a former employee. Eg: Do they trust the information he has provided? Or would a new recruitment manager provide a different analysis & outcome?

And you like your explanation a "fair bit better"?

Yes I do.

Perhaps one day we'll know more about the week's intrigue and then we'll be in a better position to pass judgement about what happened and who should be held to blame.

You want to know who I think is mainly to blame for W186 - the Geelong Football Club. They are an extremely talented, ruthless unit playing on their home ground where they have a massive advantage. It doesn't take much for a team to be "off" and the Cats will pounce. Look at the R24 result against Collingwood the 2nd best team in the comp at Collingwood's home ground. The Cats are mainly to blame. That we were off our game is a big contributing factor - why? McLardy interviewing team leadership, Bailey rumoured to be reappointed - I agree it's up for conjecture.

Yes. However you can't really make an informed judgement without trusted analysis & data of what your going to potentially use them on. My point remains that the club doesn't have a recruitment manager hence what basis are they going to make an informed decision?

The information they have at hand comes from a former employee. Eg: Do they trust the information he has provided? Or would a new recruitment manager provide a different analysis & outcome?

The recruitment manager's position encompasses appraising future draft classes, as well as the immediate one.

And the recruitment manager has not done this on his own.

There would still be a wealth of data they could use to determine whether or not to use compo picks this year or not, and I imagine the decision was already 90% made at the time BP resigned.

They are inane questions you've asked me.

That is about the most wafer-thin response you could give. Why bother?

You've accused me of unconsciously working for an an oligarchy that runs the site that I have not met and then suggested that I am victim to a series of cogntive errors. When asked a set of questions you just refuse to engage. You are able to question my character and duck the issue. I think lawyers call that 'Ad Hominem'. Try playing the argument.

Don runs a finance company. What does he know about how an FD should run? Why was Jim left to monitor something he couldn't? What was Don trying to do before the Geelong game? Why was Baliey fired after Gary got involved?

These questions are important because they go to the heart of how decisions get made. Now, everything may work for the best but it will due ot good luck rathre than good planning. That is not something I was to see perpetuated. If you cannot answer these fairly basic questions then it is clear that you do not want to question the board, that you seen no issue with or need to ensure a separation between board and day-to-day club functions and that whatever Jim/Don do is fine, regardless of impact or consequence. Devotion is cute, but thoughtless and deliberate ignorance ain't.

The recruitment manager's position encompasses appraising future draft classes, as well as the immediate one.

And the recruitment manager has not done this on his own.

There would still be a wealth of data they could use to determine whether or not to use compo picks this year or not, and I imagine the decision was already 90% made at the time BP resigned.

It's all guess work though isn't it. Your presuming a lot of things in your assumption that the decision is 90% made & also that the existing recruiting data collected is to the satisfaction of the new FD.

That is about the most wafer-thin response you could give. Why bother?

These questions are important because they go to the heart of how decisions get made.

They were inane questions (to me) because obviously I'm not in a position to answer them - and nor are you.

What do you propose...that the senior side and Casey teams be fired as well?

They all played a role, for whatever reason??

I propose we get ourselves a better president. This club needs a leader who leads through his actions and who can continue to push this club forward. I don't think Mclardy is the man. Why wasn't Leoncelli replaced, why was an ill Stynes allowed to oversee the FD and why was an egomaniac media personality allowed to step in and step out as he pleased? Mclardy was in a large part responsible for all these mistakes, not to mention talking to the players prior to Geelong. I take my hat off to him for his role in helping the club and I'm happy for him to stay in some role as the past few years have been tough. However i don't want him leading the club, Do you?

I propose we get ourselves a better president. This club needs a leader who leads through his actions and who can continue to push this club forward. I don't think Mclardy is the man. Why wasn't Leoncelli replaced, why was an ill Stynes allowed to oversee the FD and why was an egomaniac media personality allowed to step in and step out as he pleased? Mclardy was in a large part responsible for all these mistakes, not to mention talking to the players prior to Geelong. I take my hat off to him for his role in helping the club and I'm happy for him to stay in some role as the past few years have been tough. However i don't want him leading the club, Do you?

YES

I propose we get ourselves a better president. This club needs a leader who leads through his actions and who can continue to push this club forward. I don't think Mclardy is the man. Why wasn't Leoncelli replaced, why was an ill Stynes allowed to oversee the FD and why was an egomaniac media personality allowed to step in and step out as he pleased? Mclardy was in a large part responsible for all these mistakes, not to mention talking to the players prior to Geelong. I take my hat off to him for his role in helping the club and I'm happy for him to stay in some role as the past few years have been tough. However i don't want him leading the club, Do you?

Is there a better person to be President of the MFC right now?

I do not know that answer. So until there is a better person i am more than happy for Mclardy to be in the position. Since 2008 this club has got bigger and more in tune with it's business environment. The road is rocky, but it will get better.

By the way i do not consider Garry Lyon an egomaniac media performer. Garry is a past captain and champion of our club. Your view of Garry is insulting.

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.

West Coast players from their team of the early to mid 90's regulalry talk about the day at Windy Hill in 1989 when they got belted by well over 20 goals and they only kicked 1 goal for the day. They remembered the pain and got strength from it 12 months later 1990 a drawn prelim with the Pies, 1991 Runners up to the Hawks before being Premiers in 1992.

Gives us some hope although they were virtually a state team at that time

West Coast players from their team of the early to mid 90's regulalry talk about the day at Windy Hill in 1989 when they got belted by well over 20 goals and they only kicked 1 goal for the day. They remembered the pain and got strength from it 12 months later 1990 a drawn prelim with the Pies, 1991 Runners up to the Hawks before being Premiers in 1992.

Gives us some hope although they were virtually a state team at that time

That is what i mean....To forget 186 is to just brush it away....The entire club must remember and feel the pain and humiliation that it gave us all, and to make a statement to itself that to go there again or anywhere near it is just totally unacceptable...no matter what the reason or excuse.

That is how Hawthorn changed their culture...up till the late 50's they were belted weekly....by all.

That is what i mean....To forget 186 is to just brush it away....The entire club must remember and feel the pain and humiliation that it gave us all, and to make a statement to itself that to go there again or anywhere near it is just totally unacceptable...no matter what the reason or excuse.

Frankly i prefer actions. Statements are just words.

And I dont think anyone is trying to "forget" 186. The astute people at MFC would be placing it in its proper context and situation, identifying the issues and dealing with them...rather than drowning in melodramatic ultimatums.

Yes I do.

You want to know who I think is mainly to blame for W186 - the Geelong Football Club. They are an extremely talented, ruthless unit playing on their home ground where they have a massive advantage. It doesn't take much for a team to be "off" and the Cats will pounce. Look at the R24 result against Collingwood the 2nd best team in the comp at Collingwood's home ground. The Cats are mainly to blame. That we were off our game is a big contributing factor - why? McLardy interviewing team leadership, Bailey rumoured to be reappointed - I agree it's up for conjecture.

You and I differ on the cause and effect but what do you reckon the losing margin would have been the players disliked Bailey and discovered he was about to be reappointed?

250 points?

It's just that I'm trying to work out the bounds of possibility for GWS when their players get jack of Sheedy in the latter part of 2012.