this is exactly why you cannot blame the club for Jnr's exit.

Bruce left for less money, even after the Dawks advised him not to.

Not really.

If McDonald was offered a 1 year deal I'm sure he would have taken it on the spot. He wanted to play on but the club said no.

Bruce was asking for 2 years instead of 1 and played hard-ball until the very last moment.

Not really.

If McDonald was offered a 1 year deal I'm sure he would have taken it on the spot. He wanted to play on but the club said no.

Bruce was asking for 2 years instead of 1 and played hard-ball until the very last moment.

yes. But who else leaves a club to join another for less coin.

You cannot plan for that.

Where is Bruce now? In the Coaches Box at Hawthorn!!! Has been since he retired. You would think he must have something to offer!!!

Where is Bruce now? In the Coaches Box at Hawthorn!!! Has been since he retired. You would think he must have something to offer!!!

good. He will learn how to win. The way Norm Smith won.

We can employ him again in a few years...

James McDonald appeared a very fine and decent man. An excellent example to all. However, this did not make him a leader and particularly not for the very young players at Melbourne.

Certainly not in the vein of Voss, Herd or Hodge.

For him to be effective as captain, he needed a committed senior playing list behind him. The players were mostly not senior and most of those that were gave no indication of being committed. He could not "lead" them in these circumstances.

As a player he was a great trier but running out of legs.

The only reason Melbourne may have kept him would have beenin the hopes his legs would last for the year until Grimes, who is showing some real leadership potential, was giving some indication that he could play most ot the year himself.

It is generally accepted that Junior was a fine leader ..... who set an impeccable example on/off the field - and whose views were always respected.

Whether or not he would have more kicks and more tackles than the options should have been beside the point. He would have helped build the work ethic that Neeld has (so rightly) concentrated on this year. He should have been allowed to continue - perhaps not as captain - but as someone who represented the intangible qualities the club needs to lock in.

[by the way I didn't want to lose Bruce either - but the club did the right thing sticking to the principle of a one year contract for 30 year olds. I suspect that with the benefit of hindsight Bruce might now regret that he didn't accept it]