So you're saying what exactly?

He wanted the bigger challenge?

He wanted the biggest challenge. He is an ambitious man.

Coaches of flag winning Melbourne teams are immortalised, for reasons this week has highlighted.

If Mark can do what so many have failed to do, he joins Checker Hughes and Norm Smith as a legend of the game.

Just saw this on the Age:

http://www.theage.co...0521-1z1di.html

So the assertion is that he picked us because we moved first. The other assertion - without it being explicit - is that the other clubs were probably not going to select him (and that Melbourne were the only ones that did not do some testing).

It annoys me no end that the club would even say that we were in a hurry to appoint someone. It undermines the appointment, no matter if it is true. We should just say we were rapt to get him, think he is the best thing for the club and thats it. Why do we open ourselves up to interpretive journalism that when crafted the way Carro puts it (accurate or not) makes us look like we are amatuers playing against professionals.

I reckon we remain steadfast in our support for Neeldy and make sure we rid this club of pea hearted wimps. Football is a tough industry, losing is hard, life is hard. Lets learn from everything and get bloody better.

Didn't profile the coach... but "...we had identified very quickly the type of person we wanted."

Didn't interview D Martin

Where is the Due Diligence.

and that is not to say Neeld is the wrong guy, but perhaps he could have been better supported if the club understood his weaknesses. Maybe the result would have been a culture change that crashed through instead of just crashed

Didn't profile the coach... but "...we had identified very quickly the type of person we wanted."

Didn't interview D Martin

Where is the Due Diligence.

and that is not to say Neeld is the wrong guy, but perhaps he could have been better supported if the club understood his weaknesses. Maybe the result would have been a culture change that crashed through instead of just crashed

Agree. But more over whatever the background is to his appointment, dont mention anything about the selection process. We should say we were happy with it and are happy with Neeld. End of story. Dont give anyone an opportunity to write this sort of stuff. Again, it makes the Board look like they are incapable of runing an AFL club.

Agree. But more over whatever the background is to his appointment, dont mention anything about the selection process. We should say we were happy with it and are happy with Neeld. End of story. Dont give anyone an opportunity to write this sort of stuff. Again, it makes the Board look like they are incapable of runing an AFL club.

When you say runing did you miss an "n"..... or an "i"?

Adelaide just pole axed the Blues (gotta love that) and sit in second spot.

Mark could have coached them instead of us (if you believe some reports from last year), so what made him pick us instead of the Crows?

What did he see?

Anyone?

Check out my post "the wrong call".

Neeld was overlooked for the Adelaide/Bulldog appointments. We rushed to pick him otherwise it was VFL for Neeld.

But the pressure has continued to mount on Neeld, who declared last September on his appointment: ''I simply want to coach the team that is the hardest to play against in the AFL. That means all over the ground, we're going to be the hardest to play against. That's what our aim is, as simple as that.''

Despite the perceived competition, Neeld did not reach the last stage of the Bulldogs' coaching search, which went to Brendan McCartney. At the end of 2010, Neeld was interviewed for the Port Adelaide job, but after profiling did not reach the final stage of that process in which Matthew Primus was chosen ahead of Chris Scott.

The Adelaide final four was made up of Sanderson, Neeld, Scott Burns and Rodney Eade. When the Crows conducted their final interview with Neeld he had not yet met the Melbourne panel, which offered him the job 72 hours later

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/deecision-on-the-run-20120521-1z1di.html#ixzz1vZ6gX0MZ

We didn't do a psyche profile?

GOOD!

I can't stand the BS psycho-babble that determines coaches (and players for that matter).

This isn't a straight-up-and-down management job.

It's more involved than that.

Parkin would never have got a job if they did a psyche test.

They saw who they wanted and went out and got it. If Adelaide's claim they wanted Sanderson all along is true then we would have got the same result - Neeld as coach.

When you say runing did you miss an "n"..... or an "i"?

Nice one!! Clever.

Not saying the Board cant run an AFL club to AFL standard, just that they make it look as though they cant with errors like this (i.e. letting information like this slip out).

Parkin would never have got a job if they did a psyche test.

LOL..................add Sheedy, Percy Jones, Big Nick, .......I could go on

BTW do you have to fail the test to get a job. You would have to be crazy to coach

LOL..................add Sheedy, Percy Jones, Big Nick, .......I could go on

BTW do you have to fail the test to get a job. You would have to be crazy to coach

I agree DC....Coached myself in a suburban team....Bald as a bager now.....and looks ten years older

The list and performances to date have been cruelled by the inability of Gysberts (back/ankle/jaw), Blease (broken leg), Tapscott (hip), and Strauss (broken leg) to string games together. I still rate all of these players, but they just haven't had a run at it. Young players need consistency of games to develop and they just haven't had that opportunity. Not one of these players has eked out 20 games. Compare that with Jack Redden, Rockliff, Melksham and Bastinac who have all played over 40. Not surprisingly some supporters will start doubting the capabilities of the Melbourne boys, but I reckon each one of them can be regular best 22 players. It will make an enormous difference if they can fulfill their potential.

Some may call it bad management, but I really do think it's just been bad luck. Not all of our plight is down to bad luck, but we have had our fair share.

He wanted the biggest challenge. He is an ambitious man.

Coaches of flag winning Melbourne teams are immortalised, for reasons this week has highlighted.

If Mark can do what so many have failed to do, he joins Checker Hughes and Norm Smith as a legend of the game.

I reckon that's rubbish; Neeld was an assistant who wanted a Coaching gig and these know they might only get one crack.

Beggars can't be choosers and he wasn't going to turn down a gig if he got an offer.

Wilson's article in The Age today supports the idea that he was happy to go with whichever AFL Club offered him a job first.

I reckon that's rubbish; Neeld was an assistant who wanted a Coaching gig and these know they might only get one crack.

Beggars can't be choosers and he wasn't going to turn down a gig if he got an offer.

Wilson's article in The Age today supports the idea that he was happy to go with whichever AFL Club offered him a job first.

Caroline Wilson's Article also states:

"With the Demons yet to re-sign Mark Jamar or Brent Moloney among others and both conceding they were fielding offers, McLardy also defended the decision to vote that pair, along with former captain Brad Green and Aaron Davey, from the leadership group."

Demons 2012 Leadership Group:

Who is that back row, 2nd from left?

Don't always believe what you read

Because the MFC was the only offer?

I bet right now he wishes he was still an assistant at the Pies

Didn't interview D Martin

Everyone had Scully and Trengove 1 and 2. Not a problem re Martin, get over it.

Pysch profiling for Neeld? We did all that and more with Bailey and look where it got us.

I think it's because he didn't realise that he was inheriting the dumbest AFL list in history. 8 months to get used to a new way of doing things? In any other workplace they would've been fired months ago.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/crows-got-it-right-rejecting-mark-neeld/story-fn83zgw9-1226363950856

The big issue here is not so much Neeld but more the process that the Club went through - why did we rush to appoint a coach that no one else wanted? It's the same reason we should be asking why Dustin Martin wasn't even interviewed when he was clearly a top 5 or top 3 pick when we had picks 1 and 2

http://www.adelaiden...9-1226363950856

The big issue here is not so much Neeld but more the process that the Club went through - why did we rush to appoint a coach that no one else wanted? It's the same reason we should be asking why Dustin Martin wasn't even interviewed when he was clearly a top 5 or top 3 pick when we had picks 1 and 2

You are taking things as gospel.

You shouldn't do that with words from the club, and you shouldn't do that with words from the papers.

Everyone had Scully and Trengove 1 and 2. Not a problem re Martin, get over it.

Pysch profiling for Neeld? We did all that and more with Bailey and look where it got us.

Everyone......

and that means you don't even speak with Martin? See I find that baffling and really undisciplined.

The list and performances to date have been cruelled by the inability of Gysberts (back/ankle/jaw), Blease (broken leg), Tapscott (hip), and Strauss (broken leg) to string games together. I still rate all of these players, but they just haven't had a run at it. Young players need consistency of games to develop and they just haven't had that opportunity. Not one of these players has eked out 20 games. Compare that with Jack Redden, Rockliff, Melksham and Bastinac who have all played over 40. Not surprisingly some supporters will start doubting the capabilities of the Melbourne boys, but I reckon each one of them can be regular best 22 players. It will make an enormous difference if they can fulfill their potential.

Some may call it bad management, but I really do think it's just been bad luck. Not all of our plight is down to bad luck, but we have had our fair share.

Indeed BH.

Anyone watching Blease play against Sydney should now see what he can offer the team. Watts playing down back, you can see how that will help his development and confidence. Development from

a physical and intensity aspect and confidence from reading the play and getting to contests; having an impact. In a very dull night result wise I thought these two were positives.