Cook over Darling looks like a howler now. Darling was probably a West Coast set up. The word on him at the time was he was a real head case. Suspended from school then night club fights before the draft. Now he seems fine but he could have been a disaster. Also who's to say there wouldn't be a major go home factor for him. (Trying to see the good side to this story )

What made Darling such a head case? As far as I can tell the suspension was because he, ahem, had a girl in his bed on school camp and he was king hit outside a night club. Hardly cause to hang the bloke.

What made Darling such a head case? As far as I can tell the suspension was because he, ahem, had a girl in his bed on school camp and he was king hit outside a night club. Hardly cause to hang the bloke.

Didn't hold his knife and fork properly, tuck his shirt in or mind his 'p's' and 'q's' around senior Melbourne officials. Clear breaches of our club code.

Didn't hold his knife and fork properly, tuck his shirt in or mind his 'p's' and 'q's' around senior Melbourne officials. Clear breaches of our club code.

Apparently also breaches of every other club's code.

It's not like we overlooked him and he was snapped up a pick later. He went a full round later, after the rest of the competition also decided that he wasn't worth their first round picks.

He was more than just a delinquent. There were question marks over whether he could be a serious AFL player and whether he'd have the right attitude. Yes, so far he's proven everyone wrong. But that's the point. Everyone. Not just MFC.

Apparently also breaches of every other club's code.

It's not like we overlooked him and he was snapped up a pick later. He went a full round later, after the rest of the competition also decided that he wasn't worth their first round picks.

He was more than just a delinquent. There were question marks over whether he could be a serious AFL player and whether he'd have the right attitude. Yes, so far he's proven everyone wrong. But that's the point. Everyone. Not just MFC.

I think we can get ourselves sidetracked. It is not about this bloke or that bloke even though they are examples, it is about looking at our list and comparing it to the picks we had and deciding do we have a good list and did we draft well. I still say we drafted poorly, given our picks and I will not accept that every player who didn't make it, was the fault of poor development. Obviously some players like McDonald and Howe haven't suffered with development. Some have to have been poor choices.

I admit I know nothing compared to the recruiters, but if I was the MFC recruiter we would have an AA CHB, Talia, on our list.

Edited August 19, 201212 yr by Redleg

I think we can get ourselves sidetracked. It is not about this bloke or that bloke even though they are examples, it is about looking at our list and comparing it to the picks we had and deciding do we have a good list and did we draft well. I still say we drafted poorly, given our picks and I will not accept that every player who didn't make it, was the fault of poor development. Obviously some players like McDonald and Howe haven't suffered with development. Some have to have been poor choices.

I admit I know nothing compared to the recruiters, but if I was the MFC recruiter we would have an AA CHB, Talia, on our list.

Spot on Redleg IMO you are correct.

We may not have been the best developers going round however it is a handy excuse when a selection bombs.

Apparently also breaches of every other club's code.

It's not like we overlooked him and he was snapped up a pick later. He went a full round later, after the rest of the competition also decided that he wasn't worth their first round picks.

He was more than just a delinquent. There were question marks over whether he could be a serious AFL player and whether he'd have the right attitude. Yes, so far he's proven everyone wrong. But that's the point. Everyone. Not just MFC.

IF, his Twin brothers were in EVERY Draft since 2000, then you might have a strong argument.

But the truth is in black & white for all to see & read.

Our drafting thru the early 2000's up to 2007 has been for the largest part atrocious.

Aside from this, the Culture for 40 years has been one a self protectionism & 'Self'... A really poor environment to develop & harden young men into Warriors.

But we've developed many Business types & Professionals like solicitors & accountants.

Our suits are said to be second to No One.

So, wheres the divide? Whats going on? Why can't we develop hard men for football? Anyone see any parallel lines in this puzzle?

I think we can get ourselves sidetracked. It is not about this bloke or that bloke even though they are examples, it is about looking at our list and comparing it to the picks we had and deciding do we have a good list and did we draft well. I still say we drafted poorly, given our picks and I will not accept that every player who didn't make it, was the fault of poor development. Obviously some players like McDonald and Howe haven't suffered with development. Some have to have been poor choices.

I admit I know nothing compared to the recruiters, but if I was the MFC recruiter we would have an AA CHB, Talia, on our list.

Agree with the sidetracked bit, I was just trying to convince another silly person that there is no point in the whole 'We took X but look who was available after him' exercise, or the 'why didn't we take player x with pick x' whinge.

I still apportion the balance of the blame with our coaches and development staff, as the evidence tells us that the players we picked were not regarded as being devoid of the requisite talent to be drafted where they were at that time. But, whilst it's clear now that, if we'd picked differently, we might have won a few more games here or there, I guess people just want to use hindsight to condemn the drafters because that is the simple and easy option.

I think we can get ourselves sidetracked. It is not about this bloke or that bloke even though they are examples, it is about looking at our list and comparing it to the picks we had and deciding do we have a good list and did we draft well. I still say we drafted poorly, given our picks and I will not accept that every player who didn't make it, was the fault of poor development. Obviously some players like McDonald and Howe haven't suffered with development. Some have to have been poor choices.

I admit I know nothing compared to the recruiters, but if I was the MFC recruiter we would have an AA CHB, Talia, on our list.

And If I was a recruiter we would as well, have Danial Talia in the red & blue.

And Lachie Henderson. And I would have worked a deal for Dangerfield 2 or more years back.

And we would have more players who enjoy the physical stuff playing in Red & Blue.

I

IF, his Twin brothers were in EVERY Draft since 2000, then you might have a strong argument.

But the truth is in black & white for all to see & read.

Our drafting thru the early 2000's up to 2007 has been for the largest part atrocious.

Aside from this, the Culture for 40 years has been one a self protectionism & 'Self'... A really poor environment to develop & harden young men into Warriors.

But we've developed many Business types & Professionals like solicitors & accountants.

Our suits are said to be second to No One.

So, wheres the divide? Whats going on? Why can't we develop hard men for football? Anyone see any parallel lines in this puzzle?

Huh? Whose twin brothers?

I think you're actually supporting my argument, which is to say that we've taken talented players and injected them into a sh*thouse club, with no facilities, no heart, and no development process, such that the talent we've taken has gone to waste.

Thanks!

And If I was a recruiter we would as well, have Danial Talia in the red & blue.

And Lachie Henderson. And I would have worked a deal for Dangerfield 2 or more years back.

And we would have more players who enjoy the physical stuff playing in Red & Blue.

Yeah! And I'd be rich because I'd be able to go forward in time, work out what is going to happen int he world, and then make the best decision now! How easy is that!

Apparently also breaches of every other club's code.

It's not like we overlooked him and he was snapped up a pick later. He went a full round later, after the rest of the competition also decided that he wasn't worth their first round picks.

He was more than just a delinquent. There were question marks over whether he could be a serious AFL player and whether he'd have the right attitude. Yes, so far he's proven everyone wrong. But that's the point. Everyone. Not just MFC.

You don't get it.

Only two clubs had stated intentions and a clear need to grab a KPF early in that draft after the highly rated Tom Lynch was snapped up by GCS at pick 11. The rest went for midfielders. Those two teams were Melbourne (Cook) and Carlton (Watson). Both clubs erroneously baulked having been duped by the West Coast Eagles sting to paint Darling as Ned Kelly incarnate.

Carlton supporters are similarly miffed that they passed up on Darling but at least they have a kid who looks like he might be okay.

Melbourne just simply got the frights and stuffed it up royally, largely thanks to the worst recruiter to ever walk the face of the Earth.

Edited August 19, 201212 yr by Range Rover

Couch is a dud.

I guess people just want to use hindsight to condemn the drafters because that is the simple and easy option.

No it is not the simple option, it is THE ONLY option. How can you evaluate something before you know the result? You have to use hindsight to look back and see what were the options and what were the results.

How do you evaluate your list with out looking at it and comparing it with others and comparing it with the opportunity picks that you both had. If we had only low picks there would be more acceptance of a poor list, but that was not the case. We had several high picks and in the best vernacular I can find "fu-ked up."

PS. Hopefully our next selections and development, are better.

Edited August 19, 201212 yr by Redleg

Couch is a dud.

A player told me recently that he thought we recruited poorly last year and cited Magner and Couch as examples. He said it's all very well to have contested footy but we need speedy outside mids because we already have Jones, Jordie, and Moloney.

I asked two other recently drafted players whether the Club as a matter of practice asks them or other teammates whether they know of any players that the Club should keep an eye on(TAC, suburban leagues etc). I only asked them this because I would have thought that with 40+ players on the list with some recently playing TAC Cup they may well provide some knowledge or insight into possible future draftees.

The answer was: No they haven't asked us.

I'm not saying that the Club hasn't already got all bases covered when it comes to recruiting, but you just never know what a player knows or has heard.

Edited August 19, 201212 yr by Theo

Huh? Whose twin brothers?

I think you're actually supporting my argument, which is to say that we've taken talented players and injected them into a sh*thouse club, with no facilities, no heart, and no development process, such that the talent we've taken has gone to waste.

Thanks!

I't sounded to me like you were trying to make excuses for our recruiting, & our recruiting generally, by excusing us Missing Darling, by saying most others did likewise.

For me it's not about missing one player, but the wholistic net result of our recruiting since around the turn of the century.

We talk about this player or missing that player,,, or 'this recruiter' or 'that coach'...

To me the conversation should be about whats causing the club to fail in all these key areas necessary for any club to thrive. And IMO it's all Hinged off the Culture & attitudes that surround the club.

This is to me why we as a club, keep making the wrong choices. The attitude determines the thought processes & the ways of doing everything.

I think we have a sort of It's not us, it's just bad luck sort of thinking, instead of a Self examining process to workout what it is causing our continual failings.

IMO we are lost in too much self denial.

You don't get it.

Only two clubs had stated intentions and a clear need to grab a KPF early in that draft after the highly rated Tom Lynch was snapped up by GCS at pick 11. The rest went for midfielders. Those two teams were Melbourne (Cook) and Carlton (Watson). Both clubs erroneously baulked having been duped by the West Coast Eagles sting to paint Darling as Ned Kelly incarnate.

Carlton supporters are similarly miffed that they passed up on Darling but at least they have a kid who looks like he might be okay.

Melbourne just simply got the frights and stuffed it up royally, largely thanks to the worst recruiter to ever walk the face of the Earth.

This is the biggest load of conspiracy theory hogwash to grace the planet since someone tried to blame 9/11 on George Bush.

Look at your own signature. 'I believe in Neeld'. To do what? Coach, right? Coaching involves a lot of things. One of them is to take talent and nurture it, and get the best out of your players. Bailey failed royally at that, and that is the reason we are in the position we are in.

If Jack Darling was as good as you say he was, and was not lacking in the problems you said he was, then someone would have taken him. He wasn't a stand out target at the time. Yes, now he's clearly better than Cook. But at the time, there were enough issues (which weren't perpetuated by West Coast, you fool, they were facts) to suggest he wasn't going to be worth our trouble.

No it is not the simple option, it is THE ONLY option. How can you evaluate something before you know the result? You have to use hindsight to look back and see what were the options and what were the results.

How do you evaluate your list with out looking at it and comparing it with others and comparing it with the opportunity picks that you both had. If we had only low picks there would be more acceptance of a poor list, but that was not the case. We had several high picks and in the best vernacular I can find "fu-ked up."

PS. Hopefully our next selections and development, are better.

Right. So what would you like our recruiters to do this year? They can't time travel, so they have to do their best with the material presented to them. Right? Do you understand that?

So based on that, my argument is that I want to see our recruiters do the best they can on the evidence available to them. What happens after is obviously in part due to their decisions, but if they make reasonable and informed decisions now, I want to see our coaches and development teams do their best job to get the best out of the players. That's not happening at Melbourne, and looking back at draft day and going 'well, we could have done this or that' isn't fair.

I recall Emma Quayle suggesting some AFL clubs need to investigate Darling a bit more leading up to the draft. Perhaps she knew that the news on Darling leading up to the draft was not all it was cracked up to be.

Racism?? How is that racist you politically correct moron. Get off your high and might horse. And if you are referring to being Jewish I could tell you its not a race its a religion that happens to think they are the 'chosen people'. Can't get any more racist than that.

Gutnick was a disgrace. Stepped into the club solely for his own purpose and benefit. Did not put all of his money that he pledged. Refused to pay $300k to the club when they desperately needed it. And caused us no end of angst for two drafts. As well we had at least 4 players suffer the ignominy of tax audits which are not pleasant.

Your type make me sick. If you want to hear some real stories about Gutnick I could give them to you first-hand. I would hazard a guess to say you have never had to deal with him in business. I hold an extremely low opinion of him if you haven't gathered..

Gutnick does not have curly hair. Meanwhile, my type? Describing a Jewish person as a "squealing curly headed rat", I'd call that xenophobic. No, I haven't dealt with him in business. That's irrelevant to your original comment that I referenced. You're the disgrace.

Right. So what would you like our recruiters to do this year? They can't time travel, so they have to do their best with the material presented to them. Right? Do you understand that?

So based on that, my argument is that I want to see our recruiters do the best they can on the evidence available to them. What happens after is obviously in part due to their decisions, but if they make reasonable and informed decisions now, I want to see our coaches and development teams do their best job to get the best out of the players. That's not happening at Melbourne, and looking back at draft day and going 'well, we could have done this or that' isn't fair.

I do understand. All I am saying is that people have the right to evaluate our list and if it is poor, part of the blame must fall on the recruiters. Do you understand that?

If MFC had had darling and Mitch Clarke and Jurrah and Natanui and Cloke this year and delivered the ball inside 50 as well as we have been perhaps a lot of other players would have lifted with the psychological positive of scoring and winning games and we would see some developing into greats rather than appearing as duds to we supporters. A few goals and a few wins and a bit of confidence can make a huge difference. Suddenly the hand passes and kicks find their mark. Success breeds more success. Unfortunately we didn't make a play for Darlng because he went out drInking once or twice, we picked Watts (huge mistake) Jurrah is finished. Maybe we can still get Cloke and a couple more experienced stars plus some new potential star draft picks. They need to be big strong fast tough guys who can play footy. Forget beep tests and all that rubbish.

This is the biggest load of conspiracy theory hogwash to grace the planet since someone tried to blame 9/11 on George Bush.

If Jack Darling was as good as you say he was, and was not lacking in the problems you said he was, then someone would have taken him. He wasn't a stand out target at the time. Yes, now he's clearly better than Cook. But at the time, there were enough issues (which weren't perpetuated by West Coast, you fool, they were facts) to suggest he wasn't going to be worth our trouble.

You're like a defense attorney at the Nuremberg trials. Give up already.

I do understand. All I am saying is that people have the right to evaluate our list and if it is poor, part of the blame must fall on the recruiters. Do you understand that?

Part of the blame does lie with the recruiters. But not as much as most people, you included, think.

You're like a defense attorney at the Nuremberg trials. Give up already.

I believe in the fair trial system, so no, I will not give up.

More to the point, though, you just made all that crap up about West Coast telling clubs Darling was dangerous so he'd be left for them. That is straight out of a novel.

I think we can get ourselves sidetracked. It is not about this bloke or that bloke even though they are examples, it is about looking at our list and comparing it to the picks we had and deciding do we have a good list and did we draft well. I still say we drafted poorly, given our picks and I will not accept that every player who didn't make it, was the fault of poor development. Obviously some players like McDonald and Howe haven't suffered with development. Some have to have been poor choices.

I admit I know nothing compared to the recruiters, but if I was the MFC recruiter we would have an AA CHB, Talia, on our list.

I'd say we also made a mistake in terms of recruiting based too heavily on talent, and not heavy enough focus on character/personality/desire/whatever you want to call it.

Gutnick does not have curly hair. Meanwhile, my type? Describing a Jewish person as a "squealing curly headed rat", I'd call that xenophobic. No, I haven't dealt with him in business. That's irrelevant to your original comment that I referenced. You're the disgrace.

In jnr's defence, Gutnick was a squealing rat irrespective of race or religion, so I don't call that xenophobic.

If you think calling a jewish person "curly headed" is a xenophobic remark, you may be correct, but I'd also think it's a pretty weak complaint.

Part of the blame does lie with the recruiters. But not as much as most people, you included, think.

I believe in the fair trial system, so no, I will not give up.

More to the point, though, you just made all that crap up about West Coast telling clubs Darling was dangerous so he'd be left for them. That is straight out of a novel.

Well I'm pleased to see that you apportion part of the blame on the recruiters; the fact that we have the worst list in the competition would probably lend some weight to that.

We have recruited appallingly and the Cook/Darling comparison is just the icing on the cake; the cake itself is our list. I guess that decision was what they call the straw that broke the Camel's back.