No it wouldn't because under a though methodology he would have been interviewed along with others. If he chose not to be part of that process then I'd not have blamed the club, but we should have asked him (and others). It was lazy and poor management that we didn't.

This sounds a lot like critisim for the sake of it. We enquired with his management who said he was unavailable...and you think he should have been part of a competitive interview process along with others. I am sure you are smart enough to realise that just wouldn't have happened and it's not what freo did to land him.

I do think we stumbled. Had Ian Flack been at the club I doubt Liam would have gone to Alice by himself if at all.

Speculation.

Also, IMHO, simplistic. The Jurrah situation is, at the very least, complicated, and even if you're right, not sure what the point is or even how the club is to blame. In any case, Flack wasn't the only person to depart, pretty well the entire coaching and support staff had changed, which as we know, was difficult for many of the players.

I find it amusing RobbieF how quickly you resort to name calling and insulting people when someone has an opinion other than your own. There are no right or wrong opinions in this world. Just opinions. The point Tim was trying to make is such actions only reflect on you.

Sloonie has been big enough to apologise. You might want to condider it as well.

Let me begin by saying that if you think that's an insult you must be thin skinned.

Second I haven't said anything I regret and therefore I won't be apologising. Suck it up princess if you aren't robust enough to hold your own in an internet forum discussion, might I suggest you take up knitting. With regard to Tim I'm sure he's quite able to hold his own without your intervention, or do the three of you have an agreement?

I'll give credit to whoever got Craig and Misson. They were excellent gets and I suspect Neeld was pretty central to their decisions as they would have had to buy into his philosophy.

I do think we stumbled. Had Ian Flack been at the club I doubt Liam would have gone to Alice by himself if at all. Other things were handled poorly not least the Misfud accusations. I don't want to go into more as it will seem like I'm pushing an agenda but I do think we are much better now than we were. If MN can coach then we've got an excellent result because he's learning quickly. Having said that I'm interested that descriptions of training don't seem to indicate we are using the whole field and I don't think we can compete until we do.

Couldn't agree more. I think that one of the main areas of improvement will be the improvement in the coaching group. I'm a great believer that coaches take time to learn their trade and improve significantly in their first few years. It's why I wanted an experienced coach when we appointed Neeld because with such a young group I didn't want an inexperienced coach.

you should have called for Neale daniher to come back Fan. You could have reminisced.

and he could have run the list back down again.

This is got worst than the will he stay or go thread.

you should have called for Neale daniher to come back Fan. You could have reminisced.

and he could have run the list back down again.

Daniher and Northey are the only 2 decent coaches i have seen coach this club.

Daniher and Northey are the only 2 decent coaches i have seen coach this club.

Neither even got close mate. Maybe you might try looking to the present, or near future, for a flag winner????

I'll give credit to whoever got Craig and Misson. They were excellent gets and I suspect Neeld was pretty central to their decisions as they would have had to buy into his philosophy.

I do think we stumbled. Had Ian Flack been at the club I doubt Liam would have gone to Alice by himself if at all. Other things were handled poorly not least the Misfud accusations. I don't want to go into more as it will seem like I'm pushing an agenda but I do think we are much better now than we were. If MN can coach then we've got an excellent result because he's learning quickly. Having said that I'm interested that descriptions of training don't seem to indicate we are using the whole field and I don't think we can compete until we do.

Couldn't agree more. I think that one of the main areas of improvement will be the improvement in the coaching group. I'm a great believer that coaches take time to learn their trade and improve significantly in their first few years. It's why I wanted an experienced coach when we appointed Neeld because with such a young group I didn't want an inexperienced coach.

Do you think it is reasonable to keep Ian Flack on staff for the benefit of one single player?

Neither even got close mate. Maybe you might try looking to the present, or near future, for a flag winner????

They showed me something other coaches didnt, consistent Final appearances.

They showed me something other coaches didnt, consistent Final appearances.

You have my vote!

They showed me something other coaches didnt, consistent Final appearances.

But no premierships. Near enough good enough?

In any case, much of what we've had to put up with of late is as a result of Danihers' "short term gain" policy. Play in a few finals, but leave the club in a sorry state as a consequence? No thanks.

I'd take Neeld over both. Yes, already. Long-term culture-changer.

Daniher and Northey are the only 2 decent coaches i have seen coach this club.

But... but... but, Daniher destroyed the club! Bailey is here to turn around the mess he left behind! We for too long have been just satisfied with finals appearances! Now, we are aiming to win the flag!

Wait a minute...

Not surprised this has got back to some Bailey bashing. I am not surprised his career with us was a failure. The meddling by incompetents like CC and CS into FD matters is documented fact, aside from Whiteboard Wednesday, tanking, poor player development, recruiting, player revolts etc. All this after the meddlers took over. We will never really know if he would have been a good coach because he had too many banana skins placed in his path. What is telling though is the high regard he is held by players. His success as an assistant at PA. And his good work in assisting Sanderson in helping Adelaide rise like the Phoenix last season. With Neeld so far, his first season really sucked. All I see at this stage of his career is a good flogger of horses but not much of a leader of men.

Not surprised this has got back to some Bailey bashing. I am not surprised his career with us was a failure. The meddling by incompetents like CC and CS into FD matters is documented fact, aside from Whiteboard Wednesday, tanking, poor player development, recruiting, player revolts etc. All this after the meddlers took over. We will never really know if he would have been a good coach because he had too many banana skins placed in his path. What is telling though is the high regard he is held by players. His success as an assistant at PA. And his good work in assisting Sanderson in helping Adelaide rise like the Phoenix last season. With Neeld so far, his first season really sucked. All I see at this stage of his career is a good flogger of horses but not much of a leader of men.

With Neeld, I am happy to commit to the longer game. Cultures don't changes instantly do they?

BTW in the aggregate, we have a chance; Neeld, Craig & Misson. (edited to add the second line).

Edited January 14, 201312 yr by Left Field

But... but... but, Daniher destroyed the club! Bailey is here to turn around the mess he left behind! We for too long have been just satisfied with finals appearances! Now, we are aiming to win the flag!

Wait a minute...

I don't know about destroying the club but Daniher was nowhere near a flag and in reality never would be. We had a team of front running softies, and if the did bring their A game or if they came to play they could do quite well during the H&A season, but as soon as the pressure was applied they folded.

Now who's fault that was we can only guess, lack of funding, insufficient support and facilities were some of the reasons but the reality was we were going nowhere. Neeld is the hope of the side and if he can pull it off he will be a Melbourne hero, if he can't he will at least have toughened the team up and rid the club of the players that felt it was their right to run it.

You have my vote!

Not good enough for me anymore Old Dee I need another fix or two; who wants to see their team beaten in the first week and then have to watch the god teams contest the finals.

Not good enough for me anymore Old Dee I need another fix or two; who wants to see their team beaten in the first week and then have to watch the god teams contest the finals.

I am with you 100% robbief

My comment was in the sense of I would rather play finals football for 5 years versus the last five years of crap.

Would a rather have the results Daniher produced or Bailey?

easy answer for me.

Not surprised this has got back to some Bailey bashing. I am not surprised his career with us was a failure. The meddling by incompetents like CC and CS into FD matters is documented fact, aside from Whiteboard Wednesday, tanking, poor player development, recruiting, player revolts etc. All this after the meddlers took over. We will never really know if he would have been a good coach because he had too many banana skins placed in his path. What is telling though is the high regard he is held by players. His success as an assistant at PA. And his good work in assisting Sanderson in helping Adelaide rise like the Phoenix last season. With Neeld so far, his first season really sucked. All I see at this stage of his career is a good flogger of horses but not much of a leader of men.

The players needed a flogging.

Norm Smith couldn't survive 186.

Get real about Bailey.

He inherited some good work from Craig .

Why would CC be an incompetent?

He played for this club ,with some distinction ,and has coached at AFL level.

Neeld is here for the long haul-suck it up.

Tanking was not the problem with melbourne the truth is that melbourne has been out in the wilderness for years, living off its proud but ancient history. It lost its way, other clubs took a more professional attitude and are years ahead of us, consider the state of:

- our social club facilities for players and supporters.

- training facilities

- fitness staff ability to developing players.

- our recruitment staff, who have had more 1st round draft picks than most clubs and yet we are still one of the worst performers.

- no real strategy or game plan, who or what do we want to be... Neeld has given us a vision the hardest club to play against.

- club culture

- lack of skill

- lazy players

- players, we have been overpaying 2nd rate players for years because we have had to use our cap, players have not had to try or excel to get a game. How many MFC players have had 30+ possession games

- we have had even had easier drawns than many clubs

- debt, lack of sponsors, etc...

2009 came along at a time when all of the above was at or close to its peak. i dont believe any of the players stopped trying to play there best football, clips will show that lack of skill, lack of quality players, fitness, hugh number of injuries etc all contributed to that horrible season and several thereafter. I dont even think Bailey tried to loose. I believe he is competitive enough to want to win everytime. He may have been more adventurous in 2009 swapping players into unfamiliar positions such as in the Richmond game but what choice did he have as a coach, these moves sometimes actually worked and allowed us to almost win the Richmond game. Neeld any many others have done likewise without being called for tanking. I dont recall any games where there were wholesale changes where we left out better players, as even our better players were pretty substandard. CC and CS may have made comments and jokes about it, but in the end i doubt if that was would have influenced bailey and the players, we just were too disfunctional to do any better. If we profited by it then that was what the rules allowed. The idea that so called tanking has now made us disfunctional is nuts were were already crap and have stayed there. Neeld recognized the problems are just not having a game plan and has put into place with the football department actions to address many of the business and fundamental problems so that we have the building blocks to be a better side.

Tanking is just an excuse to say we were not really as crap as we pretended we were, truth is we were.

I am with you 100% robbief

My comment was in the sense of I would rather play finals football for 5 years versus the last five years of crap.

Would a rather have the results Daniher produced or Bailey?

easy answer for me.

I want a flag I don't want to just play finals to make up the numbers i want to go in to a final series and actually believe we can win it. I don't want what Bailey served up but I'd prefer to spend a bit of time building up a good side that can win than just fall in and fall out again. Danners was never going to win a flag.

I don't know about destroying the club but Daniher was nowhere near a flag and in reality never would be. We had a team of front running softies, and if the did bring their A game or if they came to play they could do quite well during the H&A season, but as soon as the pressure was applied they folded.

Now who's fault that was we can only guess, lack of funding, insufficient support and facilities were some of the reasons but the reality was we were going nowhere. Neeld is the hope of the side and if he can pull it off he will be a Melbourne hero, if he can't he will at least have toughened the team up and rid the club of the players that felt it was their right to run it.

He probably did get the best he could out of what he had and was going to take the list no further than he had. While not a team of glass eating, head banging tough guys, they looked downright intimidating compared to Bailey's teams.

I agree with the second part. As I have said before, Neeldy may be our 'Royce Hart' coach, the bloke who did all the spade work before hand but didn't reap the final rewards. He is setting the standards now and even if he doesn't succeed, the only blokes who will remain after his tenure is over are the ones with actual work ethics.

Not surprised this has got back to some Bailey bashing. I am not surprised his career with us was a failure. The meddling by incompetents like CC and CS into FD matters is documented fact, aside from Whiteboard Wednesday, tanking, poor player development, recruiting, player revolts etc. All this after the meddlers took over. We will never really know if he would have been a good coach because he had too many banana skins placed in his path. What is telling though is the high regard he is held by players. His success as an assistant at PA. And his good work in assisting Sanderson in helping Adelaide rise like the Phoenix last season. With Neeld so far, his first season really sucked. All I see at this stage of his career is a good flogger of horses but not much of a leader of men.

I appreciate most of the posts on this board but mate, yours are just stale. The last time I took a dump I was more impressed than when I read your 'insight' written above. Was CS meddling in areas he shouldn't have? Yes. Does he have a glow boner for the past which can grate? Yes. Has he been part of a team that cleared our debt and gotten sponsors on board during the GFC? Also yes and I believe that this is the primary role of a CEO, maintaining a bottom line. If he doesn't consider himself the second coming of Graeme Richmond (and by what I can tell, it seems he has backed away from this belief), he is fine with me. Many of us here take the Jimmy Stynes view of his stewardship: 2/3s of what he does is world class and as far as I am concerned that ain't a bad ratio.

Those who are so sure that they are so right usually end up being so wrong...

I want a flag I don't want to just play finals to make up the numbers i want to go in to a final series and actually believe we can win it. I don't want what Bailey served up but I'd prefer to spend a bit of time building up a good side that can win than just fall in and fall out again. Danners was never going to win a flag.

My problem Robbie is I think that is a very long way off.

I will be happy to see a strong MFC that wins 75% of its games and is a power in the league.

I doubt I have the time to see the MFC win the big one in September.

You will just have to cheer harder for me.

Until then can we just win 8 games in 2013?

Please

So I'm a moron, a fool and an idiot! Well another delusional backslapper that thinks deliberately trying to lose doesn't impact on a club. The record speaks for itself.

You have concluded that the MFC tanked. Some here agree, most others seem to disagree. Some good, and some not so good, arguments have been advanced in respect of each position.

From that, you have then said that the club 'deliberately' tried to lose games, which impacted negatively on the club and that the 'the record speaks for itself' in this regard.

The only 'fact' I see in this analysis is that we actually have had a bad record in recent years, including, relevantly, in 2009. I do not otherwise see any other 'fact' in your analysis to support your conclusion that we 'deliberately lost' games, or how this accounts for why we've had such bad record in recent years.

For instance, I don't believe Neeld manufactured any 'deliberate losses' last year, despite our poor record in 2012. (And I think he is, and will eventually prove to be, an extremely good coach for us.)

In short, there are a multitude of reasons as to why we've had a poor record in recent years, and they're pretty bloody obvious to most devoted supporters here.

Relevantly, there is no concluded definition of 'tanking' and, from what I've read to date, there is no credible evidence I've seen to suggest we 'deliberately' lost any games. Taken at its very highest, the evidence appears pretty weak - and even that would be adopting Ms Wilson's anti-intellectual way of reasoning, which is inductive (ie, selective), rather than deductive, which is generally how educated people think.

In short, our record has not been very good. It has not been very good for a long time. But for you to suggest it's because we 'deliberately lost' games in 2009 is not, to my mind, credible. The evidence, taken as a whole, doesn't support such a conclusion. I assume you disagree, in which case would you please point to the specific compelling evidence to suggest otherwise?

I would say that the club's priority in 2009 may have been in developing younger players and trying to build a better list (ie, positive long term strategy), but to suggest that the club 'deliberately lost' games, which is essentially tantamount to saying the club was fraudulent in its approach to each game and in its application within each game, doesn't reconcile with what I have observed in the last pathetically painful six years, or from what I have read as being the evidence that has emerged from this 'investigation' to date.

I doubt I have the time to see the MFC win the big one in September.

You seem sprightly enough to me, but if that's the case, perhaps you could consider becoming Very Old Dee?

My problem Robbie is I think that is a very long way off.

I will be happy to see a strong MFC that wins 75% of its games and is a power in the league.

I doubt I have the time to see the MFC win the big one in September.

You will just have to cheer harder for me.

Until then can we just win 8 games in 2013?

Please

I'm hoping for 10 wins this season; wouldn't that shut the knockers up.