If he has plans to come back soon, that is a different story.

So what is the story ? Do we know ? Besides being placed on the LTI list do we know the story ? His intentions ?

if we throw Mitch to the wolves now we might as well fold and move to Tassie because it will destroy any culture we have built.

T.assie wouldn't have us either

not in favour of censorship, we will end up with a collective of monotonous conversations, mjt attacks mitch and gets attacked himself to the point of extinction by some moral high grounders who think only they have the mental fortitude and reason to decide what is right or wrong, some of you act like mitch is your only son ffs, it will be a very dull and self serving forum is this continues, he is a demon supporter and deserves a place on here

He was behaving like a complete turd - that's different. Nobody's against free speech, but this isn't an argument about the Constitution. It's an argument about the code of conduct for this website, which we've all signed up to.

No doubt Clarks leave will give him time to get over his injuries anyway.

Can't help to take some weight off his foot for a while - might do him some good.

Hogan and Dawes out there would all but ease the pain many are feeling about the Clark loss.

Not if you believe what the club has said previously. His problem they say is the result of time out caused by the foot injury and a lack of conditioning to play and train without getting soft tissue injuries. He needs to get work into his body, the foot is not a problem.

I reckon most have seen both sides of the argument. I'd leave it there Nut, clear thinkers know what's right.

you're attitude is disgusting,

1. stop being so entitled, Mitch has issues, we let him deal with them, if he is getting paid during that time has absolutely nothing to do with you, that's between Mitch and the MFC,

2. if we throw Mitch to the wolves now we might as well fold and move to Tassie because it will destroy any culture we have built.

3. Stuie wasn't saying their injuries are similar, he was saying not paying Mitch is setting a precedent that if you are going through tough times you won't be supported by MFC.

How dare you comment on my attitude for posting my opinion, leave your personal attacks to yourself mate. That said support and money are two different things. We struggle to stay in the black and as a paid up member and contributing funds I feel that ues we should support him but paying 800k a year for a player to go on personal leave is not necessary. No one needs 35k a week as "support".

Mitch Clark (personal leave) – TBC

Jesse Hogan (back) – TBA

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-03-18/viney-set-for-vfl-after-knock-last-week

Just admit that it's the type of injury Clark has that is going over your level of understanding.

comical if you seriously think they the same thing.

. No one needs 35k a week as "support".

paris hilton does.

paris hilton does.

Are any of your fancy teaters need 35K a week Jazza?

We have to pay Mitch to meet the minimum salary cap. Also being a member does not entitle us to a say in how the club spends money, it only entitles us to a say in who runs our club.

that's cos he's just another witchdocter......beats me why he garners so much publicity

Perhaps it's because despite being persecuted in his homeland for over fifty years, he still preaches respect and compassion.

Perhaps it's because despite being persecuted in his homeland for over fifty years, he still preaches respect and compassion.

I've got nothing against the man but whatever aura there was about him kinda dissipated for me when he appeared on Masterchef..

He what?!

How dare you comment on my attitude for posting my opinion, leave your personal attacks to yourself mate. That said support and money are two different things. We struggle to stay in the black and as a paid up member and contributing funds I feel that ues we should support him but paying 800k a year for a player to go on personal leave is not necessary. No one needs 35k a week as "support".

I've been a fully paid member and donated to the club for a long time now, i have no issue with Mitch taking Personal leave, and i have no issue with him being paid during that time, it's not his fault he is going through the tough time he is, it's not like he simply isn't turning up to training.

Some posters need to take a hard look in the mirror...

Would these posters expect their employer to support them if they were ill ?????

Football clubs are workplaces & players need to be treated in the same way!

Community expects high standards & role models from clubs & players... Let's show the respect when players are not well both physically & mentally!

How dare you comment on my attitude for posting my opinion, leave your personal attacks to yourself mate. That said support and money are two different things. We struggle to stay in the black and as a paid up member and contributing funds I feel that ues we should support him but paying 800k a year for a player to go on personal leave is not necessary. No one needs 35k a week as "support".

You don't get it, you probably never will, and it's a shame there are people that think like you do.

I may be wrong, but my opinion is that it is a selfish, brattish attitude.

I've been a fully paid member and donated to the club for a long time now, i have no issue with Mitch taking Personal leave, and i have no issue with him being paid during that time, it's not his fault he is going through the tough time he is, it's not like he simply isn't turning up to training.

If an immediate family member of mine passes I am given 3 days paid leave. LiKe Mitch I would be going through a tough time...probably worse and like Mitch it would not be my fault. So tell me why Mitch should be paid 35k a week when the average person in our society would not get more then a few days paid leave for losing a family member.

You don't get it, you probably never will, and it's a shame there are people that think like you do.

I may be wrong, but my opinion is that it is a selfish, brattish attitude.

You don't get it, you probably never will, and it's a shame there are people that think like you do.

I may be wrong, but my opinion is that it is a selfish, brattish attitude.

How is putting the club first before one particular player selfish?

If an immediate family member of mine passes I am given 3 days paid leave. LiKe Mitch I would be going through a tough time...probably worse and like Mitch it would not be my fault. So tell me why Mitch should be paid 35k a week when the average person in our society would not get more then a few days paid leave for losing a family member.

You're just continuing to show your ignorance and embarrass yourself.

Compassionate leave and stress leave are completely different.

Try reading here:

http://workforcelegal.com.au/pages/faq-stress-claims.html

The amount is irrelevant other than it's his usual wage so your continual quoting of your "magic number" is plain stupidity.

If an immediate family member of mine passes I am given 3 days paid leave. LiKe Mitch I would be going through a tough time...probably worse and like Mitch it would not be my fault. So tell me why Mitch should be paid 35k a week when the average person in our society would not get more then a few days paid leave for losing a family member.

Because Mitch has a contract with the Melbourne football club, the same as any other employment related contract he has certain entitlements, one is that he is paid even if he is injured.

more so that the club has an image to develop, a good way to destroy that would be to refuse to pay Mitch in this situation, i'm also sure the club knows a hell of alot more than either of us do about it, and they are the ones paying him so really it's irrelevant.

The thing that really amuses me is that you think you know enough to dictate if Mitch deserves to be paid or not, none of us know anything really, and it's insane to pretend we are in any sort of position to judge the validity of Mitch's situation.

Cos unlike you, he is on a contract that says no matter what, you get x amount per year.

Simple really.

But you keep chewing on that bone and throwing up 35k per week.

take some happy pills stuie

If an immediate family member of mine passes I am given 3 days paid leave. LiKe Mitch I would be going through a tough time...probably worse and like Mitch it would not be my fault. So tell me why Mitch should be paid 35k a week when the average person in our society would not get more then a few days paid leave for losing a family member.

3 days? Who do you work for? The Grinch?

BTW, Mitch ain't dead. Bad example!

If an immediate family member of mine passes I am given 3 days paid leave. LiKe Mitch I would be going through a tough time...probably worse and like Mitch it would not be my fault. So tell me why Mitch should be paid 35k a week when the average person in our society would not get more then a few days paid leave for losing a family member.

You just keep on thinking up irrelevant examples. Presumably he is entitled to his pay under his a contract. Full stop. If you don't like such contracts agitate within the AFL to change them.

But perhaps it would be better to reflect on how it is that people like some company directors, CEOs and their tame politicians can earn more than 50 times the average wage when such large discrepancies were unknown only 25 years ago.

how can you be male and have a name sue??