Article in Monday's Herald Sun says Matthews does not rate Mitch Clark as a power forward and that we are paying him way too much as a key forward that is not a proven performer in this position.

Leigh Matthews, Mick Malthouse and a few others like to kick us around when it comes to the big recruits for Melbourne more so than any other club gee we are a soft target.

Maybe we deserve it?

Leigh Matthews doesn't rate anything to do with the MFC.

He clearly enjoys sh*t kicking us.

I rate Mitch Clark as better than Chris Dawes and Tom Hawkins, and just as I am entitled to my opinion, he is entitled to his.

Leigh Matthews can say what he wants, hes the biggest boss ever

And whats Leigh Matthews ever done as a player or coach. Oh yes thats right he did win a few

Matthews seems to dislike us for some reason - but remember this is the man who gave us pick 14 for TJ. I think the game has passed him by.

Matthews seems to dislike us for some reason - but remember this is the man who gave us pick 14 for TJ. I think the game has passed him by.

I think a lot of people who "dislike" us are simply realistic about how pathetic this club has been for 50 years. Pity, rather than dislike, is the dominant factor at play for most commentators talking about Melbourne.

Yeah. Thing is so far he's right. He's also right about Watts. But then he's also only referring to what's in the past. Both these players aren't even 25 yet. And both will have undue attention put on them. But the difference between his opinion, and ours, is that we're in it for the long haul.

Leigh Matthews just wanted to get a mention on d'land.... dont get sucked in.

The best way to answer that comment is for Mitch Clark to prove him wrong.

IF we continue to deliver the ball into the forward line as we did in round 1, Peter Hudson would have struggled to get a kick.

Clarkes' 1st game in a new team,that still looks like it hasnt got its head around structures,and had players down on form.Matthews may yet have to eat those words.

Good on you Leigh, eat my flange

Yes I know he won four premierships as a coach , but anyone who questions why we recruited Mitch Clark as a key forward needs to have their football knowledge questioned

We could have picked up T Lockett in the pre season and he still would have struggled to have an impact the way we bombed it in all day on saturday . Give Mitch a chance he will be good for us . the forwards wernt the problem round 1 .

how life would have been sooooooo different if we pulled off the 2000 Premiership. .

Matthew's comments could be in part due to some Brisbane Lions baggage, perhaps a bit dirty on Mitch for leaving but it is true that he played better in the ruck and may not be a natural forward.

I rate Clark-seems to have something in common with another top line recruit-John Tillbrook.

The reality is he has only once in his career kicked a double figure goals tally in a season. Over the course of his career so far he has not been a particularly effective key forward. He has proven to be a reasonably effective ruckman. Neeld believes his best footy is ahead of him, and he will be given every opportunity to demonstrate his effectiveness as a key forward. At this stage, I'd say Matthews is half right (the bit about Hudson is a stretch); hopefully Neeld will be proven right in the longer term.

I guess the question will be answered in 4 years or so. In that time we all hope to see Mitch become a dominant forward and kick 50-80 goals a season. If that happens then nobody will doubt that it was a great move. If on the other hand he can't find form and plays a mediocre role, in and out of the side, never quite looking right, then we will all know that Leigh was right. Far more likely it will be somewhere in between and he will play the role we needed, take the best defender and let our other forwards develop with less pressure on them to perform immediately.

I say revisit this discussion when his contract expires.

Some of these commentators have got to show something albeit as credible, prophesising commentators in R1of a new season, What round is it? Get serious L Matthews , Malthouse, Walls, Blight they need something to talk bout. Next weeks headline will be 'Richmond can make the 8 beating Pies in a thriller' 'St Kildas season on the line N riewoldt does hammy' or MFC ARE BACK IN TOWN THE EAGLE HAS LANDED

welcome to 2012 merry go round of BS

As Neeld said, we had to grab him when he was available, because talented tall 24 year olds are never available unless they are injury prone or crackheads.

If the best we get from him is help in the ruck and a goal square decoy, we've lost nothing.

We got room in the cap, and lots more draft picks to waste.

We got room in the cap, and lots more draft picks to waste.

Let's hope we don't.

If it's a waste of money recruiting Clark (and it's not) imagine how big a waste it would have been if we hadn't got him and they'd spent it on pay rises for our senior 'stars'.

Who really cares what Matthews has to say, and even more so after 1 week of footy,

Tuck your head in Leigh!

It was Matthews who traded TJ to the Lions (for a first round pick). not sure he should be such a smart arse when it comes to trades.

I think most people realized at the time we were paying overs for Clarke when we got him. The reality was however that we had plenty of spare cash, a desperate need for a big body down forward and a very limited choice of KPP's available (Thank God we did not fall for the Dawes option).

Whilst no Jonathan Brown I was quite happy with the recruitment of Clarke simply to help out Watts and Jurrah down forward.

Someone of Leigh Mathews experience and intelligence should be able to join the dots and see this trade for what is was. A team with the means, filling a need in a limited market. The Fact that he chooses to pot the Clarke deal after a round 1 defeat, in a game where the forward 50 delivery from our boys would have seen Pugger struggling to get a touch does little for his media credibility.

Mathews is not a Melbourne person

Water off a ducks back IMO

On face value Mitch Clark was worth $350k a season. We paid the extra 100-150K or whatever it was because we had to. From a footballing and a membership perspective, we simply couldn't afford to enter another season without a half-way talented big fella to sit in the square.

Good on Clark for being in the right place at the right time, but Leigh Matthews will be correct in his assessment until he finds that third and fourth gear we all desperately hope he can.

Leigh's call is more than a little worrying as I respect his footy opinion and I've never found him to be deliberately partisan against us or any other club.