a club that was "about anything but football"

[The Chazz 4,077]

Would it be a good thing or a bad thing if Malthouse becomes more involved with this club??

Thoughts??

I've asked a similar question on a different thread (the Dennis Commetti one I think).

If Malthouse knows things about behind the scenes at the MFC, is Neeld using him as a "mentor"? If not, WTF is Neeld talking about our issues to him for? If he is Neeld's mentor, WTF is Neil Craig doing?

[Sir Why You Little 34,436]

I've asked a similar question on a different thread (the Dennis Commetti one I think).

If Malthouse knows things about behind the scenes at the MFC, is Neeld using him as a "mentor"? If not, WTF is Neeld talking about our issues to him for? If he is Neeld's mentor, WTF is Neil Craig doing?

Don't knock it Mate...Our new Coach will need all the mentoring he can get....The whole reason the club has had a major revamp over the last 8 months is because we were doing this wrong.

If Mark Neeld wishes to bounce of Neil Craig & his old Boss MM....Good for us...Mick was a great coach, & he also knew the resorces needed to get the best results...No time for sulking....The MFC needs to suck it up & learn.

[Guest José Mourinho]

I've asked a similar question on a different thread (the Dennis Commetti one I think).

If Malthouse knows things about behind the scenes at the MFC, is Neeld using him as a "mentor"? If not, WTF is Neeld talking about our issues to him for? If he is Neeld's mentor, WTF is Neil Craig doing?

Do you REALLY think that you change a club culture in 1 preseason + 3 games?

REALLY??

Is Neil Craig's sole role as Neeld's mentor?

Is Neeld not allowed to talk to anyone else he knows in the football industry?

[Guest Jackie]

I'm starting to think Malthouse's comments are publicly channeling Neeld's inner thoughts. As for the lame culture as far as I am concerned it been there for five decades with a brief lull in the late eighties and I don't buy the argument that it was any better in the decade before Jim and Co took over. That decade was a cycle of insipid seasons followed by seasons of atonement but the penny never dropped that great sides never take the foot of the pedal just because they made the finals the previous year. The Gardiner mob nearly bankrupted the club. And they hired Bailey on the premise that our list was still a finals and flag hope until the ugly truth was revealed to how tired and effete our list was and still is.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Jackie

[Red and Blue Bloke 20]

Raising flags before games.

Club blazers.

Tom Scully debacle.

Fighting with Hancook.

Public coach interview process.

Losing assistants and taking on old boys on tenure.

Dumb game plans from the 90s.

Sacking veteran players for 18 year olds that need to play VFL.

Smug attitude about an unproven list.

Pressers about giving famous numbers to kids.

List can go on and on.

Malthouse hit the nail right on the head.

[diesel 420]

Gardiner mob nearly bankrupted the club. And they hired Bailey on the premise that our list was still a finals and flag hope until the ugly truth was revealed to how tired and effete our list was and still is.

The Gardiner board revealed the extent of our indebtedness accumulated over years and years. They didn't have a plan to eradicated the debt but they didn't "nearly bankrupt the club". I also disagree that they hired Bailey because they thought we were still a flag chance, we were appalling in Daniher's last year. Everyone knew we would most likely have to bottom out.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Raising flags before games.

Club blazers.

Tom Scully debacle.

Fighting with Hancook.

Public coach interview process.

Losing assistants and taking on old boys on tenure.

Dumb game plans from the 90s.

Sacking veteran players for 18 year olds that need to play VFL.

Smug attitude about an unproven list.

Pressers about giving famous numbers to kids.

List can go on and on.

Malthouse hit the nail right on the head.

The bolded points are rubbish.

You're just clutching at straws to make a stronger case.

[Guest José Mourinho]

The Gardiner board revealed the extent of our indebtedness accumulated over years and years. They didn't have a plan to eradicated the debt but they didn't "nearly bankrupt the club". I also disagree that they hired Bailey because they thought we were still a flag chance, we were appalling in Daniher's last year. Everyone knew we would most likely have to bottom out.

True.

And Bailey was a highly rated assistant coach, that we could get on a cut price deal.

I don't think there was a lot wrong with Bailey as a coach, and that he could probably go and coach a team like St Kilda or Adelaide and do ok.

But I think we were simply too great a challenge for him, and for many coaches.

Neeld is one of the few who I have confidence are up to it.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,395]

I don't value Malthouse's comments at all.

Example 1: On Channel 7 GameDay yesterday he was asked a simple question by John Anderson "Fletcher or Scarlett". He answered "Fletcher". Just one hour later on 3AW he said Scarlett was the best full back he'd ever seen. One hour later he said Silvagni was the best full back he'd ever seen.

Example 2: On 3AW yesterday he was asked to comment on Collingwood's situation. He said he's not in a position to know because he no longer works there. And he's probably right. So why would he have any credibility about comments he makes about Melbourne?

[Guest Jackie]

I also disagree that they hired Bailey because they thought we were still a flag chance, we were appalling in Daniher's last year. Everyone knew we would most likely have to bottom out.

That's not What was widely reported in the media then.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Jackie

[pitmaster 3,063]

We were appalling in Daniher's last year. Everyone knew we would most likely have to bottom out.

Not quite everyone. Bailey at interview told the Board we were potential finalists in his first year (remember how highly rated we were at the end of '06), BUT within a couple of months he was back to the board to declare us as shiteful and in need of a rebore, new rings and gaskets.

[Guest Jackie]

Not quite everyone. Bailey at interview told the Board we were potential finalists in his first year (remember how highly rated we were at the end of '06), BUT within a couple of months he was back to the board to declare us as shiteful and in need of a rebore, new rings and gaskets.

That's perhaps why Sheedy did not get the job. He would have told the board how crappy we were. How gullible was the board?

[Sir Why You Little 34,436]

I don't value Malthouse's comments at all.

Example 1: On Channel 7 GameDay yesterday he was asked a simple question by John Anderson "Fletcher or Scarlett". He answered "Fletcher". Just one hour later on 3AW he said Scarlett was the best full back he'd ever seen. One hour later he said Silvagni was the best full back he'd ever seen.

Example 2: On 3AW yesterday he was asked to comment on Collingwood's situation. He said he's not in a position to know because he no longer works there. And he's probably right. So why would he have any credibility about comments he makes about Melbourne?

Neeld & Leigh Brown are now Coaching at MFC...that is 2 very good reasons

[Guest José Mourinho]

That's perhaps why Sheedy did not get the job. He would have told the board how crappy we were. How gullible was the board?

We went with Bailey mainly because of the $$$.

[Guest Jackie]

We went with Bailey mainly because of the $$$.

how much for sheeds?

Edited April 16, 2012 by Jackie

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,078]

The comment annoyed me because he is perhaps making what has been said privately to him by Neeld public, and in doing so making Neeld look ordinary.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Maybe the old coach can't let go and is still coaching his former charges?

Teaching Neeld a lesson that he should be careful who he talks to, even if it's an old mentor?

In his position, his confidence can easily be betrayed.

But in the end, I don't think he's divulged anything we don't already know.

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,078]

That's perhaps why Sheedy did not get the job. He would have told the board how crappy we were. How gullible was the board?

But I thought the Demons liked 'home truths?' -

Edited April 16, 2012 by Norm Smith's Curse

[The Chazz 4,077]

The comment annoyed me because he is perhaps making what has been said privately to him by Neeld public, and in doing so making Neeld look ordinary.

Amen brother.

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,078]

Maybe the old coach can't let go and is still coaching his former charges?

Teaching Neeld a lesson that he should be careful who he talks to, even if it's an old mentor?

In his position, his confidence can easily be betrayed.

But in the end, I don't think he's divulged anything we don't already know.

True - the actual comment is undoubtedly accurate

[Fork 'em 6,507]

Comments like Malthouses give me the shytes.

Spit it out for god sake.

Don't just spill little hints.

We all know we're rubbish.

We want to know why.

[Sir Why You Little 34,436]

The comment annoyed me because he is perhaps making what has been said privately to him by Neeld public, and in doing so making Neeld look ordinary.

How does it make Neeld look bad?

He has just walked in from the biggest club in the land....we have been told how far back we are.

Good it is out in the open....No more excuses.

[mauriesy 6,790]

That's perhaps why Sheedy did not get the job. He would have told the board how crappy we were. How gullible was the board?

That's what annoys me about these threads. You make two unproven assertions and come to a definite conclusion.

[Sir Why You Little 34,436]

Comments like Malthouses give me the shytes.

Spit it out for god sake.

Don't just spill little hints.

We all know we're rubbish.

We want to know why.

Give it time....it will come out.

[dee-luded 2,958]

My understanding is that the football club has been too under-resourced until this year, and the players were left to their own devices to too much of an extent.

The majority of the group being so young, they didn't have te experience of knowing how a professional footballer should behave, and the focus has wandered.

It sounds like babysitting, but these kids seriously needed supervision and a greater constant presence to demand their focus on football and the little things,

To enforce a professional routine so that it becomes habit.

We have had a lot of players who have acted like footy is their part time job, not their life.

This has greatly impacted development. Before you criticise Cale Morton, consider the environment he has been in, and consider why he has failed to develop?

He started well, but he hasn't really progressed beyond what he was when entering the club. He's possibly even regressed.

The adjustments are being made, and they will take time, and they will make a serious difference.

Give players like him and Bennell, etc some time in this enhanced environment before putting them in the recycling.

Oh, is that what happened at Carlton back in the '90's before Pagan, when they went down?

They were 'Under Recourced'.... that must be it, poor Carlton & poor Melbourne, simply under resourced, why didn't we think of that any sooner than 2009?

And So, "under resourced" in the 1970's !

"under resourced" in the 1980's !

"under resourced" in the 1990's !

& Now, "under resourced" in the 2000's !

2010's ?????

must be it, it's so simple, it's not us & our ways, how we pamper & spoil them.. Harry Hopman was way off beam when he thought the young players should doo it tough when they got cocky, they'd scrub the floors.. not getting ahead of oneself.

can you see my implication?

# Heres what I'm saying, the Bombers with they're windy Hill home ground, & social club, some how endeared the players and gave them a hardness & an honesty that drove them onwards. Feet on the ground stuff.

The Hawks with they're Glenferrie aboad & they're Thursday night sausage sizzles kept their feet close to the ground and was a good breeding ground for a tough Unit & success.

The Blues have done OK based at Prices Park I understand. They've trained hard there & played hard there, Oh, & they've enjoyed the fruits of they're labors there as well. over the decades.

Professional clubs with their social clubs oriented together, but an all encompassing club with all it's members & supporters together. No segregation at all. The honesty flows IMO from there, the starting point is the contact with the average supporter & their ordinary wishes.

We are missing some fundamentals of what a football club is... Their not politicians who need distance & no questions. they're footballers playing for their people, and need to be exposed to those people, the peoples joy & the peoples disappointment.

Not is some swanky upstairs bar overlooking everyone else.

They send a chosen 2 down to talk to the Redlegs, or how many to the tridents, and thats it??? Is that all she wrote?

Theres something wrong here, maybe we are breeding politicians & business people who make money, because we don't make footballers, thats for sure.