Maybe I am seeing only what I want to see, but after replaying many times the look on the face of Roos tells me that it was a slip of the tongue. One can only hope...

But I think the truth is out there in the wild wild west.

Edited August 27, 201312 yr by dee-luded

I dont know if this has been mentioned elsewhere and cant be fagged scrolling back through threads but did anyone listen to the interview with Glen Bartlett on the MFC website called " Glen Bartlett Reveals Coach Candidates"

There's no direct discussion of candidates per se (aside from Bartlett saying he's not prepared to discuss much at this point), rather footage of what I can only assume are the candidates for the job.

The footage shows: Roos, Eade, Voss and Craig

I think it would be reasonable to assume that the coach is out of that lot.

The absence of Choco footage would lead me to believe, he's not on the AFL's MFC's list, given the title of the interview.

I dont know if this has been mentioned elsewhere and cant be fagged scrolling back through threads but did anyone listen to the interview with Glen Bartlett on the MFC website called " Glen Bartlett Reveals Coach Candidates"

There's no direct discussion of candidates per se (aside from Bartlett saying he's not prepared to discuss much at this point), rather footage of what I can only assume are the candidates for the job.

The footage shows: Roos, Eade, Voss and Craig

I think it would be reasonable to assume that the coach is out of that lot.

The absence of Choco footage would lead me to believe, he's not on the AFL's MFC's list, given the title of the interview.

I just saw that as typically bad sub editing. Classic put on a headline/title so people watch even though it has nothing to do with the content.

Quite possibly but whopping error if Choco is still on the radar

I dont know if this has been mentioned elsewhere and cant be fagged scrolling back through threads but did anyone listen to the interview with Glen Bartlett on the MFC website called " Glen Bartlett Reveals Coach Candidates"

There's no direct discussion of candidates per se (aside from Bartlett saying he's not prepared to discuss much at this point), rather footage of what I can only assume are the candidates for the job.

The footage shows: Roos, Eade, Voss and Craig

I think it would be reasonable to assume that the coach is out of that lot.

The absence of Choco footage would lead me to believe, he's not on the AFL's MFC's list, given the title of the interview.

If our coach is not announced by the 15th Tues 17th of September,,, then I'm sure it won't be Roos, & I reckon Eade & Choco will be out by that time as well.

Edited August 26, 201312 yr by dee-luded

Just on the couch, they were talking about Malthouse going "bonkers" in the coaches box. Then Gerrard said to Roos while laughing "I don't know why your going back to coaching Roosy." They then quickly changed the subject...

if he goes anywhere it will be Lions......

Dunkley & O'Loughlin were nobodies before Rocket got hold of them, from my memory of 1996 he turned Stafford into almost the best ruckman in the league and he also made the likes of Luff, Matthews & Crouch into solid players.

The Dogs under Rohde were almost as bad as we were under Neeld, it was he who turned Gilbee into a player when he was almost delisted under Rohde. Rockets game plan and ability to instil confidence into the group was a major factor.

I don't cop all this our list is so bad it will take 5 years to sort out, don't kid yourself that our list is that bad, there are holes big holes but our list is bereft of confidence more than anything else and we can turn very quickly into a mid table side and good development can see us finals bound in 2/3 years

I think that both you and Oucher were correct about Eade but in different ways. Eade did inherit some good players at Sydney but i believe it was he who turned it in to a good list, they certainly played much better under him than under Barrass. If another coach had taken the job; would he have done as well as Eade and would the players have come on as well as they did? The same applies to the Bullies, how many of those players were brought on by Eade.

Who knows what our team would be like if we had appointed a good coach in 2007, who knows what our players will turn out to be if they have a good coach and a good game plan next year? It's hindsight to say the Swans and Bullies lists were good, because it may have been Eade who made the difference and another coach, like Neeld for instance, may have destroyed the players and their confidence.

I reckon on balance you have to give credit to Eade for the job he did.

I think that both you and Oucher were correct about Eade but in different ways. Eade did inherit some good players at Sydney but i believe it was he who turned it in to a good list, they certainly played much better under him than under Barrass. If another coach had taken the job; would he have done as well as Eade and would the players have come on as well as they did? The same applies to the Bullies, how many of those players were brought on by Eade.

Who knows what our team would be like if we had appointed a good coach in 2007, who knows what our players will turn out to be if they have a good coach and a good game plan next year? It's hindsight to say the Swans and Bullies lists were good, because it may have been Eade who made the difference and another coach, like Neeld for instance, may have destroyed the players and their confidence.

I reckon on balance you have to give credit to Eade for the job he did.

Spot on Robbie people seem to want to have an experienced coach but then doubt their achievements

Eade has the runs on the board at two clubs not many of those about at present.

PS how is the trip going?

The club interviewed Rodney Eade and Mark Williams in recent weeks and also remains open to the possibility of Paul Roos becoming a candidate.

Bartlett told AFL.com.au that the decision on who would next coach the club was something Melbourne had to get right.

He said the club needed "a coach that has a real track record of developing players and programs".

Quoted from the MFC web site. Nothing much has changed, we may as well delete 2900 posts from this thread

Yep, nothing has changed, we hope to get Paul Roos, but if we don't it will be Williams, Eade or Craig.

The only thing that has changed is us sounding out Ling for an assistant role, I hope he comes on board.

i still think its strange approaching potential assistants without a senior coach

i still think its strange approaching potential assistants without a senior coach

think hard about what you just wrote !

implying the decision is made bb?

implying the decision is made bb?

well... maybe.

There's nothing possibly incorrect about that which you put, but its a somewhat odd thing to be doing as yuo suggest , unless..

I mean what are they doing otherwise, fishing ?

I mean , who goes shopping for tyres before you know the car they're going on ?

Edited August 26, 201312 yr by belzebub59

well... maybe.

There's nothing possibly incorrect about that which you put, but its a somewhat odd thing to be doing as yuo suggest , unless..

I mean what are they doing otherwise, fishing ?

Honestly mate, they wouldn't be silly enough to be fishing imo, what would Eade for example think about taking the worst coaching job in the world if he didn't get to pick his assistants?

The club would no Craig has the ability to sell next to no hope and that's one of the criteria so i highly doubt he will be the coach, were suggestions Roos had signed way back in june or was very close so it's possible something has been sorted the whole time,

if Mark Williams is not being seriously considered ( providing the decision has not already been made ) it would be as big a mistake as appointing Mark Neeld in the first place.

well... maybe.

There's nothing possibly incorrect about that which you put, but its a somewhat odd thing to be doing as yuo suggest , unless..

I mean what are they doing otherwise, fishing ?

I mean , who goes shopping for tyres before you know the car they're going on ?

Is it not possible to get in early that you'd ask around as to who might want to be an assistant. Then be able to tell the coach once selected that a,b,c and d have all said they have an interest, so which ones interest you?

Is it not possible to get in early that you'd ask around as to who might want to be an assistant. Then be able to tell the coach once selected that a,b,c and d have all said they have an interest, so which ones interest you?

It is possible, but what if the coach turns around and says that's great but.... i don't want any of those people as assistants, for us to be talking to assistants there would be some level of influence from prospective coaches going on, otherwise we are just trying to be seen to be doing something.

Thats called fishing Sue. But it supposes much. You then require potential candidates ( assistants) to be prepared to show their cards before all else.

id suspect any Coach to be worth his salt would privately be sussing out his running mates.

Its getting mighty close to D day . Youd think someone would have been called back for a possible 2nd chat ?

something's very odd..lol

Thats called fishing Sue. But it supposes much. You then require potential candidates ( assistants) to be prepared to show their cards before all else.

id suspect any Coach to be worth his salt would privately be sussing out his running mates.

Its getting mighty close to D day . Youd think someone would have been called back for a possible 2nd chat ?

something's very odd..lol

Exactly right, and as long as it isn't Craig coaching us next year i really couldn't give a [censored] of the three other candidates assuming Voss doesn't get the gig also

implying the decision is made bb?

quite awhile, imo.

the mechanations of the afl world.

True.

Reportedly his laptop had a last minute breakdown and Hardwick was unable to give his planned PowerPoint presentation.

I've also a couple of years later seen it reported that it was the excuse given due to Hawthorn being unhappy with him using large chunks of their IP in an interview, or that he "threw" he interview because he didn't want the job (when he could've just turned it down if offered).

Pretty sure that was Hardwicks interview at Essendon not Melb

Is it not possible to get in early that you'd ask around as to who might want to be an assistant. Then be able to tell the coach once selected that a,b,c and d have all said they have an interest, so which ones interest you?

The coach will pick his assistants, its been a few weeks since Neeld was sacked, they must have a fair idea who they want and the assistants our new coach would be after, Eades been very quite the last 2 weeks.

Pretty sure that was Hardwicks interview at Essendon not Melb

Not sure. It may have been. I wasn't there and it's too long ago.

But I've since seen it reported that Hardwick "tanked" his interview, attributing that as happening when interviewing for the job Bailey eventually "won".

Not sure. It may have been. I wasn't there and it's too long ago.

But I've since seen it reported that Hardwick "tanked" his interview, attributing that as happening when interviewing for the job Bailey eventually "won".

Hardwick "tanked" his interview? What a load of garbage...

I might not have been clear, but that is also my opinion.

But some gutter journos, in an effort to give MFC another kick in the guts during coverage of one of our litany of incidents, have made that claim.

Can't remember who or where, but it was sufficiently obnoxious enough to stick in my memory.