Plenty of supporters would be happy that we don't have Ross Lyon as coach, but within the industry he's recognised as being in the top echelon of coaches; and this is evident with how Freo are now playing. I distinctly remember Paul Roos dropping hints when he was On the Couch that Melbourne could do with a coach like Lyon. Then there were unsubstantiated rumours that Lyon was interested in the Melbourne job only for the bombshell to be announced a couple of weeks later that he was going to Freo. Not withstanding our poor showing this year I suspect that Lyon would have preferred to not uproot his family and move halfway across the country. Apparently Garry Lyon was told that Ross would be staying with the Saints; and seeing he and Ross shared the same manager in Craig Kelly he didn't go behind Craig's back and contact Ross directly. Why not ? Weren't we after the best coach we could find ? It seemed to me at the time that Ross Lyon would have been one of the first calls you'd make. It had been in the media that he hadn't re-signed with St.Kilda so you at least had to make direct contact and ask the question. Or even make him an offer he'd find hard to refuse. Whether Demonland posters personally wanted Ross, or not makes no difference to the process we should have followed.

Now I hear on the radio tonight from Mark Robinson that he was chatting to Leigh Matthews recently who revealed that Melbourne didn't contact him at all. Not even a phone call. At the time there was speculation that Leigh could have almost been cajoled into the job. Shouldn't we have at least made contact ?

I don't want to pot Garry Lyon, because I respect him as a dedicated Melbourne person and know that he was a reluctant participant in finding a coach having previously stated that he didn't want be involved again. He'd been there and done that with Bailey. But he wasn't the only one on the committee.

WTF is going on down at Melbourne ?

Matthews has been out of the game for a long time. His game plan suited an era that has passed. Not surprised they didn't call him.

...and Leigh Matthews thinks Ben Hudson is the recruit of the year!!!

Ross Lyon never made it known he was on the table he was actually poached by freo.

He wasn't on the market he was expected to stay at St. Kilda

Gary Lyon spoke about Ross on an episode earlier this year on footy classified that he was never on the table as looking to leave the saints.

Ross Lyon should've coached that St.Kilda side to a flag ... but he didn't.

Good coach but certainly not worthy of the title 'great' ... yet.

Edited August 31, 201212 yr by Range Rover

This list is very poor.

Freo have a better list.

Neeld has to start bottom up.....he's a young man with plenty of energy.

Nothing against you BH but once you quote Mark Robinson all credibility goes down the zoomer.

For all Ross Lyon's brilliance, where are Fremantle on the ladder??

He obviously knows what he's doing, but ask St. Kilda supporters what they think of his coaching style, and you'll get a different answer. I've also heard he wasn't the most inclusive senior coach in regards to his assistants, being somewhat authoritarian and dogmatic. As for Leigh Matthews..Can't pot him for what he's achieved...but he's been out of the loop for a few years now, and while he's proven adept at extracting the potential out of talented 'mature' sides, i'd wonder just how he'd fair with our lot considering he was so opposed to adapting to new gamestyle trends in his last years at Brisbane..

I think we made the right choice, but obviously supporters expect immediate results and don't always see the bigger picture.

If I were Mark Neeld, I would be deeply regretting accepting the offer, and thinking i'd be better off coaching Collingwood's midfield where I know at least i'm not going to have any excuses for poor performance.

Edited August 31, 201212 yr by King Cuthbertson

Plenty of supporters would be happy that we don't have Ross Lyon as coach, but within the industry he's recognised as being in the top echelon of coaches; and this is evident with how Freo are now playing. I distinctly remember Paul Roos dropping hints when he was On the Couch that Melbourne could do with a coach like Lyon. Then there were unsubstantiated rumours that Lyon was interested in the Melbourne job only for the bombshell to be announced a couple of weeks later that he was going to Freo. Not withstanding our poor showing this year I suspect that Lyon would have preferred to not uproot his family and move halfway across the country. Apparently Garry Lyon was told that Ross would be staying with the Saints; and seeing he and Ross shared the same manager in Craig Kelly he didn't go behind Craig's back and contact Ross directly. Why not ? Weren't we after the best coach we could find ? It seemed to me at the time that Ross Lyon would have been one of the first calls you'd make. It had been in the media that he hadn't re-signed with St.Kilda so you at least had to make direct contact and ask the question. Or even make him an offer he'd find hard to refuse. Whether Demonland posters personally wanted Ross, or not makes no difference to the process we should have followed.

Now I hear on the radio tonight from Mark Robinson that he was chatting to Leigh Matthews recently who revealed that Melbourne didn't contact him at all. Not even a phone call. At the time there was speculation that Leigh could have almost been cajoled into the job. Shouldn't we have at least made contact ?

I don't want to pot Garry Lyon, because I respect him as a dedicated Melbourne person and know that he was a reluctant participant in finding a coach having previously stated that he didn't want be involved again. He'd been there and done that with Bailey. But he wasn't the only one on the committee.

WTF is going on down at Melbourne ?

The club would not have been able to afford Lyon, Roos or Malthouse. That's what's going on at Melbourne & if the club were serious about bringing in experience they would have chosen Malthouse as he is a more marketable option, but they didn't do that either.

The club would not have been able to afford Lyon, Roos or Malthouse. That's what's going on at Melbourne & if the club were serious about bringing in experience they would have chosen Malthouse as he is a more marketable option, but they didn't do that either.

Given the large expansion in the FD, could the club have gone for Lyon and saved some money on the FD, if that was really a problem? I too am not a fan of Lyon, but there was a case for going after him given the club's own comments on wanting an experienced coach.

The club would not have been able to afford Lyon, Roos or Malthouse. That's what's going on at Melbourne & if the club were serious about bringing in experience they would have chosen Malthouse as he is a more marketable option, but they didn't do that either.

Marketable??? That's a key criteria for selecting a coach..They sounded out both Roos and Malthouse, but neither were available to coach for 2012 for different reasons. This is fairly common knowledge..

Marketable??? That's a key criteria for selecting a coach..They sounded out both Roos and Malthouse, but neither were available to coach for 2012 for different reasons. This is fairly common knowledge..

Roos was never interested. I'm not too sure whether they sounded out Malthouse. When I talk about marketing the interest in Malthouse from supporters & media would have helped pay his wage. I think his record speaks for itself in terms of selection criteria.

Roos was never interested. I'm not too sure whether they sounded out Malthouse. When I talk about marketing the interest in Malthouse from supporters & media would have helped pay his wage. I think his record speaks for itself in terms of selection criteria.

Under Malthouse's agreement with Collingwood he wasn't allowed to coach until 2013.

Whether marketing hype stemming from reputation can pay a wage or not is irrelevant, we need people who can turn us into a long-term sustainable success.

Edited August 31, 201212 yr by King Cuthbertson

Under Malthouse's agreement with Collingwood he wasn't allowed to coach until 2013.

Whether marketing hype stemming from reputation can pay a wage or not is irrelevant, we need people who can turn us into a long-term sustainable success.

We all no agreements can be broken. The issue was whether or not the parties involved in approaching Malthouse were prepared to pay legal costs. Your last sentence is irrelevant, as I stated his record speaks for itself.

WTF is going on down at Melbourne ?

Quite. Can't they consider your feelings when making these decisions?

Hey Ben-Hur. Last I checked, these things were all in the past. It doesn't matter now.

Let it go.

There is nothing to gain in chewing over this old bone. You're only upsetting yourself.

There's only one way now, and that's forward.

if we had contacted leigh matthews and got him there would be no mitch clark

WTF!! these discussions have all occurred before its like ground hog day in here first Beamer is leaving in a Brockesque fashion and now the old the coaching selection panel didn't do enough, next we will have people saying Mick Malthouse is available lets sack the Neeldy and steal him from Carlton.

We all no agreements can be broken. The issue was whether or not the parties involved in approaching Malthouse were prepared to pay legal costs. Your last sentence is irrelevant, as I stated his record speaks for itself.

Apparently not. Jason Taylor, is by many reports our new Head of Recruiting.

Eddie McGuire was, and is, determined to make sure both Taylor and Malthouse fulfill their contractual obligations. There's no way Malthouse could've coached us this year, as he already had a contractual arrangement with Collingwood. It was terminated on the basis that Malthouse agreed not to coach another AFL club in 2012.

It isn't irrelevant. We're a LONG term project, as opposed to Carlton who are after flags in the next three years. Malthouse isn't going to be coaching into his 70's and Carlton know that. It's a short term ploy in the hope they can snatch a flag or two while Judd's still at the top of his game.

Is it really in the best interests of our clubs long term future to go after a coach who is only intending to be in the gig for 3-4 years??

Edited August 31, 201212 yr by King Cuthbertson

Apparently not. Jason Taylor, is by many reports our new Head of Recruiting.

Eddie McGuire was, and is, determined to make sure both Taylor and Malthouse fulfill their contractual obligations. There's no way Malthouse could've coached us this year, as he already had a contractual arrangement with Collingwood. It was terminated on the basis that Malthouse agreed not to coach another AFL club in 2012.

It isn't irrelevant. We're a LONG term project, as opposed to Carlton who are after flags in the next three years. Malthouse isn't going to be coaching into his 70's and Carlton know that. It's a short term ploy in the hope they can snatch a flag or two while Judd's still at the top of his game.

Is it really in the best interests of our clubs long term future to go after a coach who is only intending to be in the gig for 3-4 years??

It's called buying out a contract.

Malthouse is barely 60, compare that to sir Alex ferguson who is approaching 70. If you think Malthouse will only coach for 3-4 years that's your opinion. He may not even coach at all but I wouldnt put limitations on what he is capable of.

Is this to say you don't like Neeld?

How the hell can you tell when we don't have a midfield?

Is this to say you don't like Neeld?

How the hell can you tell when we don't have a midfield?

Well we didn't perform.due diligence with Dustin Martin who would be our best mid so it's all related.

Edited August 31, 201212 yr by Geddy Lee

It's called buying out a contract.

Malthouse is barely 60, compare that to sir Alex ferguson who is approaching 70. If you think Malthouse will only coach for 3-4 years that's your opinion. He may not even coach at all but I wouldnt put limitations on what he is capable of.

I don't think it was money that was McGuire's motivation. They had contractual obligations to fulfill and Collingwood were within their rights to see that they were.

When this whole Buckley/Malthouse arrangement first came about, Malthouse said he wanted to coach for five more years. He ended up getting 2 years as senior coach & 3 years as 'director of coaching' This was in 2009 I believe. So that takes us to 2014..

Not exactly long term..

Edited August 31, 201212 yr by King Cuthbertson

Well we didn't perform.due diligence with Dustin Martin who would be our best mid so it's all related.

How does that relate to Neeld?

I don't think money that was McGuire's motivation. They had contractual obligations to fulfill and Collingwood were within their rights to see that they were.

When this whole Buckley/Malthouse arrangement first came about, Malthouse said he wanted to coach for five more years. He ended up getting 2 years as senior coach & 3 years as 'director of coaching' This was in 2009 I believe. So that takes us to 2014..

My point remains that there is nothing to stop someone resigning or walking out on a contract. Just like there is nothing to stop a coach being sacked whilst they are contracted. There are ramifications sometimes involved but to say that Malthouse couldn't coach this year if he wanted to is what Eddie will have you believe nothing more.

My point remains that there is nothing to stop someone resigning or walking out on a contract. Just like there is nothing to stop a coach being sacked whilst they are contracted. There are ramifications sometimes involved but to say that Malthouse couldn't coach this year if he wanted to is what Eddie will have you believe nothing more.

If it were that simple, then why isn't Jason Taylor our head of recruiting right now??

Because, apparently he had told Collingwood he'd accepted an offer from us??