Should the club really dignify him with a response?

I'd feel embarrassed if they were to do that.

Absolutely, love the way Smooth has been clamped, and Don is offering out information as required, obviously a planned tactic, the club has been keeping responses in house, not leeking at all, very happy.

Should the club really dignify him with a response?

I'd feel embarrassed if they were to do that.

Jose, this response needs more than the 'like this' button. My thoughts exactly.

He had problems with

- length of drive to Casey for summer training

- MFC didn't like him doing burnouts in his ute on an oval kindly loaned to us for preseason training

- CFC offered him a longer contract and more $$$$

There was no mention of alleged tanking - maybe he was not bright enough to have known what the whole football world already knew well: that he was moving to the architects of tanking.

Yes I recall that, what astounding arrogance and what a fragile sense of self esteem that man has.

The man's an arrogant pig I met him in Dublin in 84.

Don't forget he donated $10K to Jimmy's debt demolition in 2009, not so disillusioned at that point.

Don't forget he donated $10K to Jimmy's debt demolition in 2009, not so disillusioned at that point.

At that point he thought he was going to captain all the young talent we were going to recruit.

When his position in the team started to look shaky .... when he saw Scully and Trengove taking his place ...... he started to change his tune..

Three years later , a mis-kick makes him a one week hero - and he throws the dirt. A man who despises tanking goes to the winner of the Kruezer Cup om principle? I don't think so Brock. .......... man couldn't lie straight in bed

He had problems with

- length of drive to Casey for summer training

- MFC didn't like him doing burnouts in his ute on an oval kindly loaned to us for preseason training

- CFC offered him a longer contract and more $$$$

There was no mention of alleged tanking - maybe he was not bright enough to have known what the whole football world already knew well: that he was moving to the architects of tanking.

The most important reason, and the one that you are missing, is that Brock had been tried and was unable to play any position other than central midfield.

And he just wasn't effective enough. Barely scraping into our best 22 by the end of the season.

With us aiming for an influx of serious midfield talent, his opportunities were seriously limited.

I'm surprised some don't remember this.

He had problems with

- length of drive to Casey for summer training

- MFC didn't like him doing burnouts in his ute on an oval kindly loaned to us for preseason training

- CFC offered him a longer contract and more $$$$

There was no mention of alleged tanking - maybe he was not bright enough to have known what the whole football world already knew well: that he was moving to the architects of tanking.

I think Redleg posted an approximate difference between the contract values.He's been prolific lately so I've no intention of trawling through his posts. And as Jose points out, at the time Brock was sinking rapidly down the ranks in the midfield. With two new midfielders being recruited, it's fair to assume he saw the writing on the wall & went for the cash & contract. The rest is just window dressing. The "Blind Freddie" stuff he spouted on OTC is just [censored].

McLean cops a fair bit of [censored] for instigating this investigation with his OTC comments but I doubt for a minute that he went to the studio thinking he'd be talking about Melbourne. He'd rediscovered form, resurrected his career & kicked the winning goal out of his arse. In my view he was ambushed & didn't have the smarts to deal with it. A simple "I've moved on from Melbourne & just want to talk about the Blues" would have sufficed.

As I remember, he was asked to take a substantial pay cut while Carlton offered him a great deal, he couldn't get a regular game due to always being injured and appearing too slow. I think to find the other reason you may have to speak to Brad Green. His form at the Blues had been woeful and he managed to turn it around only in the second half of the season and only time will tell if his purple patch is sustained. Just because he donated lots of money to the club does not entitle him to think he was above scrutiny for poor form and poor judgement, one only has to read his tweets to see that!

who gives a shyte why he left, he's a [censored] and glad he's gone, good riddance to bad rubbish and slow turtles

Yes I recall that, what astounding arrogance and what a fragile sense of self esteem that man has.

I hate having to defend Sheeds, but arrogance tends to be a pretty important trait in a successful AFL coach.

McLean the king of all dheads was told he was not considered particularly important to us any more. It seems that there was an understanding between he and the club that he would be better off elsewhere and we would be better off with a draft pick. I am sure he was also not happy that his attempt to purchase the captaincy didn't work out. This is the guy who came at pick 5 and had most of us speculating he would become a star player an lead us to victory. All he did was play atrocious footy and hobble around like an arthritic old man. Since moving on, he has obviously been harbouring resentment as disgruntled former employees often do. He clearly wanted to the hurt the club and it worked a treat thanks to the complicity of the media. McLean is one bloke that does not have an ounce of class in his whole body.

I hate having to defend Sheeds, but arrogance tends to be a pretty important trait in a successful AFL coach.

Malthouse is not THAT arrogant. And as alluded earlier, Sheedy's arrogance is a compensatory mask for inadequacy.

Edited November 5, 201213 yr by caddypgt

Does anyone here have a source regarding why Brock McLean left Melbourne? I clearly remember reading someplace that he left due to not liking the drive to Casey (it caused him cramps) and also due to his fear of not getting a game with Scully and Trengove in the Melbourne midfield?

I'm trying to point out to someone that his claims of leaving the club due to 'tanking' and both false and misleading.

Apparently he kept on getting lost on the way to work, so he thought Carlton might be a bit less stressfull, therefore, he thought it help him play better football.

The most important reason, and the one that you are missing, is that Brock had been tried and was unable to play any position other than central midfield.

And he just wasn't effective enough. Barely scraping into our best 22 by the end of the season.

With us aiming for an influx of serious midfield talent, his opportunities were seriously limited.

I'm surprised some don't remember this.

That's my recollection too. He started a number of games in the forward pocket in 2009 (and not just the post port adelaide matches). He clearly wasn't suited to the role and i'm not sure why a slow, specialist midfield was played there for most of the year. It didn't work; he didn't look like he enjoyed the job, and it was probably one of the reasons why he left.

The most important reason, and the one that you are missing, is that Brock had been tried and was unable to play any position other than central midfield.

And he just wasn't effective enough. Barely scraping into our best 22 by the end of the season.

With us aiming for an influx of serious midfield talent, his opportunities were seriously limited.

I'm surprised some don't remember this.

Pity one Michael Sheehan, or Paul Roos, or Gerard Healy were not quick enough, or bright enough, or honest enough to raise the matters of money, driving distance or place in the team with him when he mouthed off.

McLean the king of all dheads was told he was not considered particularly important to us any more. It seems that there was an understanding between he and the club that he would be better off elsewhere and we would be better off with a draft pick. I am sure he was also not happy that his attempt to purchase the captaincy didn't work out. This is the guy who came at pick 5 and had most of us speculating he would become a star player an lead us to victory. All he did was play atrocious footy and hobble around like an arthritic old man. Since moving on, he has obviously been harbouring resentment as disgruntled former employees often do. He clearly wanted to the hurt the club and it worked a treat thanks to the complicity of the media. McLean is one bloke that does not have an ounce of class in his whole body.

Yes McLean did the wrong thing (even though it was likely not intentional - he was led up that path by the On the Couch crew), but some of the comments in your post C&B, are as lacking in class as you claim him to be. I don't think it's just McLean who's harbouring resentment.

who gives a shyte why he left, he's a [censored] and glad he's gone, good riddance to bad rubbish and slow turtles

Above we have all the reasons and a clear and concise explanation as well .

Tell it like it is Bayside.

Don't forget he donated $10K to Jimmy's debt demolition in 2009, not so disillusioned at that point.

Could somebody please enlighten us as to the date of the payment of the $10k vis a vis say, the date of the Jordan McMahon game?

If the donation was made after that game then wouldn't the inference be that he made the donation notwithstanding the so called "tanking" or "experimenting" that was going on around him and that, as a consequence, he was lying when he appeared on On The Couch?

Does anyone here have a source regarding why Brock McLean left Melbourne? I clearly remember reading someplace that he left due to not liking the drive to Casey (it caused him cramps) and also due to his fear of not getting a game with Scully and Trengove in the Melbourne midfield?

I'm trying to point out to someone that his claims of leaving the club due to 'tanking' and both false and misleading.

Money.

Edited November 5, 201213 yr by PJ_12345

Could somebody please enlighten us as to the date of the payment of the $10k vis a vis say, the date of the Jordan McMahon game?

If the donation was made after that game then wouldn't the inference be that he made the donation notwithstanding the so called "tanking" or "experimenting" that was going on around him and that, as a consequence, he was lying when he appeared on On The Couch?

I believe it was at the inaugural debt demolition, in 2008.

Curry & Beer is a lot closer to the mark than many on Brock The Queen. It was embarrassing watching him beaten to the ball by opposition who started 10 metres behind him. He was obviously hindered by injury in his final year, but I believe the club had already lost faith in him, probably encouraged him to look elsewhere. I certainly didn't get the impression that he jumped ship and that we were devestated to lose him!

Yes McLean did the wrong thing (even though it was likely not intentional - he was led up that path by the On the Couch crew), but some of the comments in your post C&B, are as lacking in class as you claim him to be. I don't think it's just McLean who's harbouring resentment.

gee that is very astute of you hardtack, yes I do harbour resentment to the bloke that has single-handedly landed a huge blow to the club with his comments. Why in the name of God would be defending him?

My take: he left because he was pushed by the FD. He's slow and his disposal is questionable. Too one-paced. Glad he's gone.

I came into this expecting some great expose regarding McLean's departure, only to be disappointed... a simple "?" mark would have made all of the difference.

And before you get upset over my pickiness, let me point out why grammar can be important; as an example, I will use capitalisation which can stop many potentially embarrassing situations... it could be the difference between "helping your Uncle Jack off a horse." or "helping your uncle jack off a horse.".

What an idiotic post. Grow up.