I can't believe people still trot out this bogus line of reasoning.

McDonald and Bruce staying would have meant we'd have finished 14th instead of 16th. That's it. They've both proven that with their showings this year (Bruce for the past two).

These guys should consider every season they are allowed to pull on the boots for Melbourne a blessing, not a birthright.

At least you got it right that the new regime are setting things right in this area.

You still don't get it.

It's got nothing to do with tails wagging dogs. It's got nothing to do with on-field results being slightly better or worse.

It's about standards, culture, leadership and trust. James McDonald was performing well enough to keep playing. If the club didn't want someone who was performing well enough to play to keep playing, you would think that they could have communicated with him and that it would not have come as a total shock. Much more so when he is your only great leader and your captain. Even the club admits that it handled it badly.

James McDonald never felt it was his right to wear the jumper. Neither does Brad Green.

If you can't treat your leaders like that. It has a ripple effect.

Ultimately, the decision on Green needs to be the club's, but in our circumstances right at the minute, if Green is adamant about going on (knowing that he may well play out his career at Casey), I would far prefer he be given the opportunity.

Not that that's a compliment. Andrew Krakouer would be leading our goal kicking if he were a Dee.

Edit: spell.

No, he wouldn't. He'd be lucky to get a kick with our pox midfield.

Player and coach at odds about when that player retires?

Jeez, didn't see that one coming.

Never has happened before and never will again.

It doesn't matter. He's the boss. And these older players have got to learn that the tail will never again wag the dog at this club. That era is over.

We will finish 16th and Green, who is 31, has had two sub-par seasons now. It's just not good enough. Most opposition sides will salivate at seeing his name on a Melbourne team sheet.

There's an opportunity there for him now to bow out gracefully, stating his desire to see our young talls given more senior experience because that would be in the best interests of the club.

Don't take the "look at moi" fist pump path, Brad. Here's a chance for you to prove you are the leader others have doubted you to be.

We have an extremely bad record in recent years of treating our older players with disrespect and contempt when comes to them closing out their careers.

Junior was the worst of them because it wasn't a gentle nudge but a hard shove out the door. He wanted to go around again, he'd earnt the right to end on his terms, he was after all still playing good football.

That caused Bruce to think about how he'll be treated in 1-2 years time by us and left for less money to be a reserves player at the Hawks. I wonder how he feels towards the club now?

Our aggressive youth policy has put former players off the club, Brad is one I want to stay with us after he hangs up the boots.

I don't think whether or not they consider it a blessing to play for Melbourne has anything to do with it, RR.

The issue is whether they should have been tossed. Not whether those players have a sense of entitlement, which to my knowledge has never been seriously suggested by anybody.

The football department considered that issue and decided that yes, their time was over.

Any noses that get point out of joint owing to such decisions, particularly when blokes have had 10+ seasons living off the fat of the land, is poor form in my view.

We have an extremely bad record in recent years of treating our older players with disrespect and contempt when comes to them closing out their careers.

Junior was the worst of them because it wasn't a gentle nudge but a hard shove out the door. He wanted to go around again, he'd earnt the right to end on his terms, he was after all still playing good football.

That caused Bruce to think about how he'll be treated in 1-2 years time by us and left for less money to be a reserves player at the Hawks. I wonder how he feels towards the club now?

Our aggressive youth policy has put former players off the club, Brad is one I want to stay with us after he hangs up the boots.

I would counter that we have an extremely poor record of allowing underperforming veterans carte blanche to stay beyond their used by date.

How does Bruce feel about the club? I would like to think quite fondly given we gave him a start and paid him top dollar over a lengthy period of time, even in the latter years when he was doing bugger all.

No, he wouldn't. He'd be lucky to get a kick with our pox midfield.

He'd be a midfielder on our list

He's an absolute gun - that 2010 season for Swan Dristricts was unreal

Ultimately, the decision on Green needs to be the club's.

That's right. Glad you get it.

Isnt there not a "list" anymore? just that each player over 30 can take 100K off the cap? and you can have as many veterans as you wish?

Then just pay him 100k or less. Its not like he ll get more coin elsewhere.

Green, Neeld, McLardy press conference at 11.40am today. Sounds like he might be calling it a day.

MFC just tweeted press conference this morning with Green, Neeld and McClardy. Retirement announcement, perhaps?

Green, Neeld, McLardy press conference at 11.40am today. Sounds like he might be calling it a day.

nooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :~(

The football department considered that issue and decided that yes, their time was over.

Any noses that get point out of joint owing to such decisions, particularly when blokes have had 10+ seasons living off the fat of the land, is poor form in my view.

"poor form" - a certain lofty disrespect in this I think. The "land" is football - which ultimately is done by players, not management. If management decisions create out-of-jointedness among the players, then more fool the ignorant and arrogant management - they [censored] on their own parade if what they do undermines the performance of the players as a group. And treating them as mere cattle, discardable at the management's call, is not going to bring out the best in them or heightened levels of commitment any more than it would in any of us. Supporters should rightly protest at such stupidity.

Human Relations 101 tells you that the psychological well-being of your staff is critical to ongoing organisational success; giving employees respect and a role in decision-making increases output and profitability enormously. Read up Ricardo Semmler, for an example.

I am not saying that there aren't tough decisions to make at times, and clearly the balance between player egos and workload has been pretty wrong at MFC for a while. Really, I'm only trying to put up a balance to RR who I think is over-stating his position - so here is the polar opposite; all I mean to say is that the answer is actually somewhere a fair way this side of RR's position. Of course everyone needs to be stepping up to higher standards, no worries. But to tell an experienced and hard-working player that his efforts no longer count, is insensitive to how he and his mates will feel. They know the bar is being raised, but if one of them is making a worthwhile contribution, and progressing, it is not going to seem fair when he is told to pack it in, management doesn't care whether or not he can meet the targets of improvement. Casting off blokes that the rest of the team have grown up with and known far longer than they've known the current management, without giving those blokes the chance to earn their place week-to-week is just unfair - it smacks of management pursuing their own theories without particular interest in the players. For those doing the real work, such arrogance at management level is alienating and dispiriting. Absolutely destructive.

(Actually, in the last quarter on Sunday, I saw Green just to the south of full forward, and one of our players had taken a mark just forward of the wing on the members' side; in front of Green was a big gap around centre-half-forward. Had Green led into the space, to 25 metres out dead in front, he couldn't have been stopped. He made no attempt to lead, presumably because team rules are that the play was to come down the boundary, and leading into the corridor wasn't on. I wondered about this. His instinct must have been to seize the opportunity, but he didn't. On fire, really, but suppressing what he is naturally good at. If this was a team rules thing inhibiting his play, I dislike it. A few minutes later, from a similar position on the members' side, Green passed the ball to Howe, in the spot he might have led to himself, and Howe gave Green what was for that game at least the absolute last word on this team rule (if it is the team rule)...

If we cut Green, and he goes elsewhere, I predict he will play superbly and embarrass a lot of people - more than were embarrassed over Junior.)

The master-servant Act is a long way out of date. It's common knowledge that Chapman got the Cats together to stop the rot, and that in 1987, six or eight weeks out and with it all going down the pan again, the senior players at MFC got together and determined what they were going to do, adding their input to that of the coach - and look what happened in both those cases. You can't disregard the importance of the players. Denying them respect, agency, ownership is just dumb. It is undermining, out-of-date, counter-productive, right-wing management-focused management. Please, don't make us have to go through such crap....

"poor form" - a certain lofty disrespect in this I think. The "land" is football - which ultimately is done by players, not management. If management decisions create out-of-jointedness among the players, then more fool the ignorant and arrogant management - they [censored] on their own parade if what they do undermines the performance of the players as a group. And treating them as mere cattle, discardable at the management's call, is not going to bring out the best in them or heightened levels of commitment any more than it would in any of us. Supporters should rightly protest at such stupidity.

Human Relations 101 tells you that the psychological well-being of your staff is critical to ongoing organisational success; giving employees respect and a role in decision-making increases output and profitability enormously. Read up Ricardo Semmler, for an example.

I am not saying that there aren't tough decisions to make at times, and clearly the balance between player egos and workload has been pretty wrong at MFC for a while. Really, I'm only trying to put up a balance to RR who I think is over-stating his position - so here is the polar opposite; all I mean to say is that the answer is actually somewhere a fair way this side of RR's position. Of course everyone needs to be stepping up to higher standards, no worries. But to tell an experienced and hard-working player that his efforts no longer count, is insensitive to how he and his mates will feel. They know the bar is being raised, but if one of them is making a worthwhile contribution, and progressing, it is not going to seem fair when he is told to pack it in, management doesn't care whether or not he can meet the targets of improvement. Casting off blokes that the rest of the team have grown up with and known far longer than they've known the current management, without giving those blokes the chance to earn their place week-to-week is just unfair - it smacks of management pursuing their own theories without particular interest in the players. For those doing the real work, such arrogance at management level is alienating and dispiriting. Absolutely destructive.

(Actually, in the last quarter on Sunday, I saw Green just to the south of full forward, and one of our players had taken a mark just forward of the wing on the members' side; in front of Green was a big gap around centre-half-forward. Had Green led into the space, to 25 metres out dead in front, he couldn't have been stopped. He made no attempt to lead, presumably because team rules are that the play was to come down the boundary, and leading into the corridor wasn't on. I wondered about this. His instinct must have been to seize the opportunity, but he didn't. On fire, really, but suppressing what he is naturally good at. If this was a team rules thing inhibiting his play, I dislike it. A few minutes later, from a similar position, he passed the ball to Howe, in the spot he might have led to himself, and Howe possibly gave Green the absolute last word on this team rule...

If we cut Green, and he goes elsewhere, I predict he will play superbly and embarrass a lot of people - more than were embarrassed over Junior.)

The master-servant Act is a long way out of date. It's common knowledge that Chapman got the Cats together to stop the rot, and that in 1987, six or eight weeks out and with it all going down the pan again, the senior players at MFC got together and determined what they were going to do, adding their input to that of the coach - and look what happened in both those cases. You can't disregard the importance of the players. Denying them respect, agency, ownership is just dumb. It is undermining, out-of-date, counter-productive, right-wing management-focused management. Please, don't make us have to go through such crap....

You write passionately but the fact remains there is a chain of command and the players sit below the generals on it. The rest is hoopla.

Thankfully we now have a coach in charge who will make these hard decisions and is not overly concerned about his own popularity in doing so.

I'm glad Brad looks set to be doing the right thing here, putting the club before himself. Kudos to him.

It seems as though much of the debate on this topic is moot. Congratulations to Greeny on a magnificent career. 251 games & 346 goals is a fantastic return. Will never forget the QF in 2000 where he helped turn over Carlton.

He could've left the club for individual success with another club but stuck fat. I respect his efforts.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-veteran-green-tipped-to-retire-20120808-23tjm.html

melbournefc Brad Green has announced his retirement and will play on to the end of the year

Good luck Brad. Doesn't make Neeld's job any easier IMO.

We have an extremely bad record in recent years of treating our older players with disrespect and contempt when comes to them closing out their careers.

Junior was the worst of them because it wasn't a gentle nudge but a hard shove out the door. He wanted to go around again, he'd earnt the right to end on his terms, he was after all still playing good football.

That caused Bruce to think about how he'll be treated in 1-2 years time by us and left for less money to be a reserves player at the Hawks. I wonder how he feels towards the club now?

Our aggressive youth policy has put former players off the club, Brad is one I want to stay with us after he hangs up the boots.

You lost me when you said "Bruce"- held us to ransom at every contract negotiation- thats his right like all players have the right - then the club made the decision on his last contract not to budge and he left. Players demand big money to play - and the club decides yes or no. The club not the player should decide when time is up- hopefully the player and club are in unison but unfortunately in Juniors case this was not so.It happens. So be it.

He will change his mind and nominate for this years draft.

You heard it here first.

Great servant to this club and would like to say thanks for his efforts, good luck in retirement Greeny, sorry I have another commitment and wont get to farewell you against Freo but hope to take my kids to your final training run to say goodbye

You write passionately but the fact remains there is a chain of command and the players sit below the generals on it. The rest is hoopla.

Thankfully we now have a coach in charge who will make these hard decisions and is not overly concerned about his own popularity in doing so.

I'm glad Brad looks set to be doing the right thing here, putting the club before himself. Kudos to him.

ok. But I noticed Malthouse quoted in today's Age, concerning Wallace as a good prospect for Port Adelaide:

"I know he has a hold on the game, he thinks about it very much in terms I probably would, playing to players' strengths..."

I would love to hear that Malthouse assessed Neeld in similar terms - but do you think he would?

From the way he refers to it, Malthouse appears to consider this "playing to players' strengths" pretty important. You can be sure he has watched Neeld's progress with great interest, and presumably with some serious reflection on why it's been so disappointing.

Perhaps Malthouse has refined his notion of what really counts. I wonder what he would say about the opportunity for some other club to pick up a player with the strengths of Brad Green.

Thanks for many great memories Brad. You should feel extremely proud of your career at Melbourne.

ok. But I noticed Malthouse quoted in today's Age, concerning Wallace as a good prospect for Port Adelaide:

"I know he has a hold on the game, he thinks about it very much in terms I probably would, playing to players' strengths..."

I would love to hear that Malthouse assessed Neeld in similar terms - but do you think he would?

From the way he refers to it, Malthouse appears to consider this "playing to players' strengths" pretty important. You can be sure he has watched Neeld's progress with great interest, and presumably with some serious reflection on why it's been so disappointing.

And, putting injuries to key players aside, he'd probably come to the same conclusion that most rational analysts would - we have the worst midfield group in the competition, too many NQR's and a playing list that needs to be further disciplined into playing tough, defensive minded football over four quarters.

Roll on the draft and the pre-season.

Good on ya Brad, been a great career.

If only you hadn't been cleaned up in a certain game in 2000.,..!