On The Couch lacks integrity, relevance

[daisycutter 29,741]

As with the Scully saga, proof and smoking guns very rarely materialize DC.

I just work from the basic premise of what motivates people in life and as a rule of thumb it is usually money.

Look Rangey I can run the conspiracy aspect too as well as anyone. I struggle though with your posts trying to distinguish between reasonable facts, reasonable extrapolation and just pure speculation.

Pure speculation repeated by yourself and then by others doesn't make it more reasonable

I'm pretty cynical myself but i'd like a little more 'substance' in some of the repeated accusations thrown about on here....but maybe i ask for too much

[Brayshaws' Helmet 143]

http://www.foxsports...3-1226439502922

well played sir, but i still don't mind the show

[Range Rover 1,935]

Look Rangey I can run the conspiracy aspect too as well as anyone. I struggle though with your posts trying to distinguish between reasonable facts, reasonable extrapolation and just pure speculation.

Pure speculation repeated by yourself and then by others doesn't make it more reasonable

I'm pretty cynical myself but i'd like a little more 'substance' in some of the repeated accusations thrown about on here....but maybe i ask for too much

DC I sometimes think the word 'conspiracy' is bandied about too easily in situations like this. We're not talking the Illuminati here. But there are millions of dollars and footballing livelihoods at stake and people are predictably jockeying for a piece of the action.

I think it is well known that certain senior players at Melbourne didn't like what happened to Junior McDonald and I think the logical extension of that is that they don't want to end up receiving what they regard as the same "shabby treatment".

The arrival to Melbourne of some big name free agents would almost certainly expedite such an occurrence.

[P-man 13,366]

OTC is compelling viewing if only to see the new innovative ways Healy will use to mask his baldness. He has one of the more intriguing comb-backs I've ever seen.

Anyhow, I must be one of the freaks who doesn't mind Roos. Everyone whose played under him loves him to pieces, and the culture instilled at the Swans is the envy of the competition. I think the man deserves to be listened to for that reason alone, and at least he isn't among the countless media personalities who change their opinions more frequently than their underwear based on who is the flavour of the week. That said, I wouldn't complain to having a new "expert" on the show just to freshen it up. Hird and Roos each served their purpose but I think it's time for another new rotation.

All three of them love sinking the boot into us, but they're in good company in the media in general. Mike's insistence that the whole Brock revelations came as a total shock and were never discussed at any stage prior, was laughable to say the least. Mike needs to stick to Open Mike. Other than that, he needs to put out to pasture. This Johnny Farnham version of retirement he's adopted is growing tiresome.

I'll still watch OTC regardless...because they discuss footy.

[Demonic_Inferno 17]

Range Rover, do you believe in Aliens?

If you don't, bout time you did I'd suggest!

[Whispering_Jack 30,674]

I've just been watching last night's OTC and I must say that Roos is a malicious toss bag when it comes to Melbourne. He never misses an opportunity to sink in the boots. He seems incapable of discussing our club in a rational manner and I'd be interested to know who or what it is that winds him up when it comes to the MFC.

I also found it interesting that the panel had to justify itself about the McLean interview and even more that Don McLardy's comments were totally misrepresented immediately afterwards. By only playing McLardy's comments denying that our players don't give their all when they run onto the field and ignoring what he said about the issues surrounding list management being a fundamental of our game (as clearly reported in the media) was a low effort and misleading to viewers. The sniggering of Sheahan and Roos that followed was pathetic.

It left me in no doubt that these blokes do have an agenda and it's left their credibility on this subject in tatters.

[McQueen 17,867]

Yeah, with any luck it will come back to bite them all on the arse.

[P-man 13,366]

I've just been watching last night's OTC and I must say that Roos is a malicious toss bag when it comes to Melbourne. He never misses an opportunity to sink in the boots. He seems incapable of discussing our club in a rational manner and I'd be interested to know who or what it is that winds him up when it comes to the MFC

Well we did inflict the biggest loss of his coaching career.

[Flying Cloud 152]

http://www.foxsports...3-1226439502922

Turned off this show ages ago, but given their apparent recent over the top negativity, I will take the next step. I notice Gillette and Sportsbet.com advertising on that site. Don't bet online, but will not buy Gillette stuff now.

[The Oracle 145]

I also found it interesting that the panel had to justify itself about the McLean interview and even more that Don McLardy's comments were totally misrepresented immediately afterwards. By only playing McLardy's comments denying that our players don't give their all when they run onto the field and ignoring what he said about the issues surrounding list management being a fundamental of our game (as clearly reported in the media) was a low effort and misleading to viewers. The sniggering of Sheahan and Roos that followed was pathetic.

Sheahan had the utter gall to describe McLardy's speech as "propaganda" when, in fact, he was using the oldest trick in the propagandist's kit bag. You're right. If there wasn't a hidden agenda behind this they wouldn't have gone out of their way to set this all up in that way.

There used to be a bloke in town years ago who did it so much better than this lot. His name was Jack Little.

[the real deelirium 8]

Paul Roos knows all about tanking.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams/afl-boss-backs-investigation-into-roos/story-e6frf9kx-1111115705014

Credibility = 0.

[Ned 156]

Dead set, these bozos are unbelievable.

The show started tonight with the Matthew Primus/Port Adelaide issue. Fair enough - it's a current and interesting issue.

BUT, within less than a nano second, the MFC then became the issue. I find it genuinely bizarre how hard they go at our club. Healy, in particular, is one very vain, yet increasingly anti intellectual, media peanut.

I also enjoyed the very contrived disclaimer they spun about last week's Brock interview as though it was a complete shot out of the blue.

Well, in short fellas - you can't have it both ways. Either you're completely naive amateurs with absolutely no useful insights into the game, or you're experienced AFL commentators who knew exactly what Brock McLean would have to say about his former club if fed some Dorothy Dix questions.

Given the way they have conducted themselves lately, I can't believe these dudes have the arrogance to question the integrity of the MFC.

And it's also stunning how basic their analysis has become. To think, I used to like this programme - and Paul Roos in particular.

Disappointing stuff.

Paul Roos is pathetic. I used to like the show too but it has just degenerated. Roos is a mealy-mouthed joke whose sole purpose, it seems is to agree with any proposition that spud Sheahan puts up. I don't have any problem with Melbourne copping a pounding. I feel ashamed of our performances and believe we're fair game. But I just find the rest of the program light-weight. Sheahan is a good reporter but provides little insight on on-field matters -- yet he drives the discussion and Roos just nods in agreement. Then there's the Swans love-in. Seriously, it should be called ``in the pond'' not on the couch. Oh the Swans this, oh the Swans that -- it totally inverts the idea Sydney doesn't get enough coverage. I've basically stopped watching it. On the Couch is a joke.

[Hannibal 5,814]

I'm clearly a nutter. I too watched the show only last night and couldn't see what all the fuss was about. I didn't see any agendas, just a couple of panellists without the best grasp of our club and circumstances.

What galled me the most was when Sheahan implied we'd made a mistake replacing Bailey with Neeld. You'd think Sheahan's been around long enough to know that the lack of game-plan and defensive aspects of our play after 4 years under Bailey was enough to warrant change. The rest didn't worry me much.

[H_T 3,049]

Paul Roos knows all about tanking.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams/afl-boss-backs-investigation-into-roos/story-e6frf9kx-1111115705014

Credibility = 0.

Excellent serve.

[Range Rover 1,935]

Paul Roos knows all about tanking.

http://www.heraldsun...x-1111115705014

Credibility = 0.

Good get. I'm with others - Paul Roos is a [censored].

[PaulRB 6,411]

He may be a [censored], but losing NAB cup (practice matches) is a long way from tanking...

[thaipantsman 180]

Dead set, these bozos are unbelievable.

The show started tonight with the Matthew Primus/Port Adelaide issue. Fair enough - it's a current and interesting issue.

BUT, within less than a nano second, the MFC then became the issue. I find it genuinely bizarre how hard they go at our club. Healy, in particular, is one very vain, yet increasingly anti intellectual, media peanut.

I also enjoyed the very contrived disclaimer they spun about last week's Brock interview as though it was a complete shot out of the blue.

Well, in short fellas - you can't have it both ways. Either you're completely naive amateurs with absolutely no useful insights into the game, or you're experienced AFL commentators who knew exactly what Brock McLean would have to say about his former club if fed some Dorothy Dix questions.

Given the way they have conducted themselves lately, I can't believe these dudes have the arrogance to question the integrity of the MFC.

And it's also stunning how basic their analysis has become. To think, I used to like this programme - and Paul Roos in particular.

Disappointing stuff.

It was just the latest, albeit hopelessly out of date, angle that they decided to take against the MFC. As everyone knows, tanking allegations against the Dees were investigated, and put to bed, ages ago.

Literally everyone also knows that Brock's own view of his worth to the MFC was very different to the MFC's view of Brock's worth - that said, not one of the panel challenged McLean on any of his comments that 'he decided to leave the club'. Clearly, it would've compromised their anti-MFC angle had they attempted to straighten up some of the facts.

Many of the angles they run against the MFC are so weak, it's caused me to think that they deliberately manufacture a negative story about the the MFC every so often. I don't know why they seem so determined to do this. It's also surprising really, given our apparent irrelevance.

I can't think of the last positive story they have run about the MFC on this programme. Actually forget positive - just balanced, well researched story.

Roos always makes a jibe at the MFC or Neeld in some way - and then, somewhat conveniently, says 'not that I know or have anything against him'.

All I can take out of this is that we're not quite as irrelevant as a club as these bozos would have us believe.

And, contrary to Roos' less than insightful comment last night about the MFC's progress since last year, we are a hell of a lot better now than this time last year. That comment, more than any other, demonstrated to me that these guys operate on pretty low level perception rather than well researched, critically reasoned, analysis of the facts. Lazy stuff.

Ironic really, given Roos stated love of the 'one percenters' - something he doesn't bring to his new career in journalism.

Agreed! Stop Watching Burgo! Same goes for the Footy Show(Ch 9 Gary Lyon/Sam Newman Rubbish). The only Footy Show worth watching these days is Marngrook! Best Viewing on the ABC. It's hilarious, informative and entertaining.

[Miles from Nowhere 199]

Roos may look good and smell nice but never forget he coached the most tedious, uninspiring football in living memory. To paraphrase Bill Shankly "If Sydney were playing at the bottom of my garden, I'd draw the curtains".

[Bossdog 2,002]

Roos may look good and smell nice but never forget he coached the most tedious, uninspiring football in living memory. To paraphrase Bill Shankly "If Sydney were playing at the bottom of my garden, I'd draw the curtains".

I agree.....made football unwatchable.........

[Whispering_Jack 30,674]

He may be a tosser, but losing NAB cup (practice matches) is a long way from tanking...

Why is that?

I would have thought it was the epitome of tanking and if the AFL is serious about the practice it would investigate this along with every other accusation of tanking we read or hear about in the media.

[Clark_Kent 315]

He may be a [censored], but losing NAB cup (practice matches) is a long way from tanking...

That is worse than what we may have done. To openly tell a player don't kick a goal

is a lot worse than making a few positional changes.

[Fork 'em 6,991]

That is worse than what we may have done. To openly tell a player don't kick a goal

is a lot worse than making a few positional changes.

Surely is.

[diesel 420]

Why is that?

I would have thought it was the epitome of tanking and if the AFL is serious about the practice it would investigate this along with every other accusation of tanking we read or hear about in the media.

Roos and Sydney (players inlcuded) didn't work to present their club at its best in NAB cup matches to give their side an advantage for the coming season in order to try to win a premiership.

Melbourne switched off towards the end of the season and didn't work to present itself at its best in matches in order to get into a position to win a premiership in future seasons.

You're right. After all we are talking about not putitng winiing matches a s priority, not how you build a list. Both could be precievd as not bing in the spirit of the game. So what's the bloody difference between us and them?

[premiers13 48]

The issue around Tanking is not a club issue. It is an AFL issue alone!

Any club that is rewarded for losing by an organisation, must in all good faith do the best to gain that reward. It's unimportant if individual clubs are accused of Tanking. Each club would be stupid not to seek the best players from the draft.

It is the AFL who created this situation. No one can surely imagine some club being found 'guilty of tanking'. How are you going to prove this? What player will do this or what official could provide enough 'hard' evidence to prove this to be a fact. That individual would be villified and 'attacked' legally in so many ways.

Brock's comments are laughable when you realise what club he chose to go to, so that he could get his integrity back! Anyone remember Kreuzer and Trapper's 40+ possessions in his last game for Melbourne?

Supposition, inuendo and 'idiots' like those on OTC have nothing in cold hard facts. If they do let's hear them. Muck raking, and Roos inability to get over the Swans heaviest defeat seem to be the stimulus.

I would believe that any club found 'guilty' and threatened with sancction could take this to court and have it thrown out. The AFL know this and will say they have investigated thoroughly and 'again' and hopefully finally, find 'no substantive' evidence. End of the story!

[H_T 3,049]

He may be a [censored], but losing NAB cup (practice matches) is a long way from tanking...

Rubbish. It's the for the same desired outcome. And he did it throughout his coaching tenure. What's that ? 6 years ?

Maybe he'll fall off the couch if one of his players come forward re: NAB Cup.

If you recall Demetriou didn't like it at the time.