Geelong obviously had their reasons, doesn't mean they were right though. Just because they have been extremely well run doesn't mean they can't make mistakes.

Agree on Moloney his time had come, Rivers not sure, could've been a handy back up down back, would do better than Pedersen or Gillies.

Who would Rivers replace of Frawley, Garland or McDonald (assuming Rivers was fully committed to the club)?

WJ makes the point about players getting involved in club politics and, irrespective of the rights and wrongs, once they get involved in that sort of thing, the exit door is the next point of destination.

Moloney was our best player in 2011 and he was committed to his club and his coach (until the flare up before the Geelong game). After that, he wasn't worth a crumpet. It's a waste of time arguing in terms of ifs or maybes and his karma comment when Neeld was sacked said it all.

Let's concentrate on what we've got because they are our future.

Who would Rivers replace of Frawley, Garland or McDonald (assuming Rivers was fully committed to the club)?

WJ makes the point about players getting involved in club politics and, irrespective of the rights and wrongs, once they get involved in that sort of thing, the exit door is the next point of destination.

Moloney was our best player in 2011 and he was committed to his club and his coach (until the flare up before the Geelong game). After that, he wasn't worth a crumpet. It's a waste of time arguing in terms of ifs or maybes and his karma comment when Neeld was sacked said it all.

Let's concentrate on what we've got because they are our future.

Rivers would replace Garland who is currently injured and would be a back up if all 3 we're fit. He could also play forward considering our injuries at the moment, would do better than Pedersen.

Players should not get involved in club politics but don't forget they were ASKED to get involved by the last admin.

Players should not get involved in club politics but don't forget they were ASKED to get involved by the last admin.

How?

Rivers would replace Garland who is currently injured and would be a back up if all 3 we're fit. He could also play forward considering our injuries at the moment, would do better than Pedersen.

Players should not get involved in club politics but don't forget they were ASKED to get involved by the last admin.

At what cost would we have kept Rivers?

And there'd be supporters screaming he was a waste of money after missing half of last season.

"How did the medical dept not know his knees were shot??" Etc, etc...

And seriously, how many good games has he really had for Geelong now?

2? 3 at a push?

Get real.

Kick 15.6 last week and we would be hooting and hollering about this game... Instead everyone is giving up...

Kick 15.6 last week and we would be hooting and hollering about this game... Instead everyone is giving up...

We were competitive last week, if we can do the same this week - happy days.

All we can ask is that the boys have a dip. As we all know, it is no fun going into games expecting a hiding.

If the lads keep having a crack, then at least it gives us supporters some interest in the MFC.

Last week, Nathan Jones was inspirational, let's hope he can lift others to play with such passion for the jumper.

Are there anymore Injury prone forwards we can recruit in the off season? John Butcher?

Edited March 30, 201411 yr by Pipefitter

We were competitive last week, if we can do the same this week - happy days.

All we can ask is that the boys have a dip. As we all know, it is no fun going into games expecting a hiding.

If the lads keep having a crack, then at least it gives us supporters some interest in the MFC.

Last week, Nathan Jones was inspirational, let's hope he can lift others to play with such passion for the jumper.

Nope, was just him again.

Dom Tyson joined him, although he did that himself.

At what cost would we have kept Rivers?

And there'd be supporters screaming he was a waste of money after missing half of last season.

"How did the medical dept not know his knees were shot??" Etc, etc...

And seriously, how many good games has he really had for Geelong now?

2? 3 at a push?

Get real.

You're a clown. No one is saying he would've solved our problems but he would've performed better than Gillies or Pedersen. He has one thing they don't - the ability to play footy.

How?

Andrews Report and then again before 186.

You're a clown. No one is saying he would've solved our problems but he would've performed better than Gillies or Pedersen. He has one thing they don't - the ability to play footy.

very hard to argue this ...lol

Those 50/50s for McDonald and Fitz seem to be 100/0 for both according to the final team listed for us. Or are they lying to us again?

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-03-28/dees-make-no-change-for-round-two

I was adamant McDonald at least would be a late withdrawal but you were right sue and I was wrong.

You're a clown. No one is saying he would've solved our problems but he would've performed better than Gillies or Pedersen. He has one thing they don't - the ability to play footy.

Call me Bozo then.

Simply, for us to keep him, he'd have cost more than he is worth.

And what sort of difference would he make to this side?

He provides no run and average kicking - not what we need.

Think, FFS.

Call me Bozo then.

Simply, for us to keep him, he'd have cost more than he is worth.

And what sort of difference would he make to this side?

He provides no run and average kicking - not what we need.

Think, FFS.

Yeah because our list is so chock full of talent that we can afford to be picky about which AFL-grade players to keep or ditch when we have numerous VFL-grade spuds taking up space. Don't know if you noticed but we've struggled to meet the cap minimum recently because our team is so [censored] there's no one worth giving much money to. I don't think forking out for Rivers would've made us any worse than we are now.

Yes, we can.

We're already at the bottom, may as well build it properly rather than just throwing money at whoever we think we can get.

The cost of retaining him would have outweighed the minimal benefit he would provide.

Complaining about letting him go is like complaining about the logo when we're getting beaten by 93 points.

You're not focusing on the key problems, or what will help us get better.

On Moloney and Rivers, it's a moot point. I believe the club did the wrong thing by itself and the playing group over the disciplining of Moloney after the night club incident in 2011. He was let off far too lightly and whether it's coincidence or something else, the situation at the club spiralled out of control for the remainder of that season.

When senior players are allowed to become embroiled in political power plays, it's not a good thing no matter who we might seek to blame or who we perceive is right or wrong.

I put it down to ineffectual leadership at all levels of the club including the playing group and to that extent, it's my view that a number of those who were leaders of the club in that unhappy period at the club needed to go for its future good.

The club thanked Moloney and Rivers for their contributions and let them go to pursue their futures elsewhere. I don't think it could or should have been any other way and I certainly can't envisage either of these players as being likely parts of Paul Roos' plans for the future.

I've commented elsewhere about Nathan Jones and how he's developed both as a player and a leader in much the same time frame. That's the future as far as I'm concerned. The other blokes are of no more interest or concern to me as any member of any other club.

You really do twist history jack to serve a purpose. You were a huge public backer of the previous admin and you backed the wrong horse badly. As PJ said today at prematch that culture at the club was poor and the the club was in a terrible place. And ineffectual leadership starts from the top...President down. You can add the past CEO. And it is a pity the acting President in 2011 chose to involve the players in the future of the then CEO.

A few facts about Beamer. He stuffed up at the start of 2011 and was demoted from the leadership group. He was publicly humiliated by Schwab and forced to admit his efforts to rehab in the glare of TV cameras. To his credit, Beamer put his head down, worked hard and won the 2011 B&F. And btw the dysfunctional problems at the club commence in 2009 with the decision to not to play to win games and bubbled throughout 2010 and 2011. It had nothing to do with Beamer.

The mismanagement of senior players and indeed most of the playing list by Neeld is well known. It's not surprising a number of players have sought greener pastures. And from the performances today I can't believe we could not find a spot for either River or Moloney. And given Roos penchant for experienced players it's naive that they would not fit into those plans.

Pot kettle black.

Rhino suggests that I twist history.

Here's how the Age reported on what he described as Beamer stuffing up - note he can't bring himself to mention the player broke club rules, was out until the early morning getting pissed and then he turns Moloney into the innocent angel who was "publicly humiliated by Schwab".

Demotion for drunk Demon

Two years earlier, Collingwood disciplined two of its players by banning them for the remainder of the season a few weeks before the finals. It came at a tremendous cost to that club in terms of its 2009 campaign but laid the foundation for their 2010 premiership. Eddie McGuire and his board were congratulated by those who mattered in football for taking a courageous stand. Nobody in their right mind would have accused him of humiliating the players involved when they apologised to their fans for their public displays of drunkenness.

On the other hand the supposedly humiliated Moloney, did not miss a game.

Yes, we can.

We're already at the bottom, may as well build it properly rather than just throwing money at whoever we think we can get.

The cost of retaining him would have outweighed the minimal benefit he would provide.

Complaining about letting him go is like complaining about the logo when we're getting beaten by 93 points.

You're not focusing on the key problems, or what will help us get better.

So Pederson, Gillies, Byrnes, Rodan make us better than Rivers would? You seriously have no idea, I doubt you even understand what point you're arguing.

I wasn't too fussed when Rivers left but in hindsight it was a mistake, it's not a big deal it's just the way it is. I'm not slitting my wrists over it and to be frank I don't really care because here or not he wouldn't make much of a difference but he would offer more than the [censored] on our list who would struggle to get a game in the VFL.

Rhino suggests that I twist history.

Here's how the Age reported on what he described as Beamer stuffing up - note he can't bring himself to mention the player broke club rules, was out until the early morning getting [censored] and then he turns Moloney into the innocent angel who was "publicly humiliated by Schwab".

Demotion for drunk Demon

Two years earlier, Collingwood disciplined two of its players by banning them for the remainder of the season a few weeks before the finals. It came at a tremendous cost to that club in terms of its 2009 campaign but laid the foundation for their 2010 premiership. Eddie McGuire and his board were congratulated by those who mattered in football for taking a courageous stand. Nobody in their right mind would have accused him of humiliating the players involved when they apologised to their fans for their public displays of drunkenness.

On the other hand the supposedly humiliated Moloney, did not miss a game.

Regardless of what happened Moloney definitely was publicly humiliated. He's a cashed-up bogan with more muscles than brain cells and he sooked it when he didn't get his way but the way he was dragged out in front of the cameras and forced to admit his guilt or alcohol problem in front of the media with Schwan sitting next to him like the Principal forcing the naughty kid to apologise was a disgrace.

https://twitter.com/SammyHeraldSun/status/450125213175267328

https://twitter.com/SammyHeraldSun/status/450125213175267328

lol

Regardless of what happened Moloney definitely was publicly humiliated. He's a cashed-up bogan with more muscles than brain cells and he sooked it when he didn't get his way but the way he was dragged out in front of the cameras and forced to admit his guilt or alcohol problem in front of the media with Schwan sitting next to him like the Principal forcing the naughty kid to apologise was a disgrace.

When Collingwood did the same thing but imposed a harsher penalty it wasn't a humiliation. It's only considered a humiliation at Melbourne.

If that's the way we think about how errant players should be treated i.e with kid gloves, then no wonder we've been and undisciplined rabble for years and no wonder we cop floggings like the one we copped today.

lol

Edging closer to 4 2 6 with every passing day.

https://twitter.com/SammyHeraldSun/status/450125213175267328

Dawes was running well on Friday, why am i not surprised he's probably had another set back.

Can I propose a mid season draft for the AFL, each club can pick one player to add to their list and it's based on the ladder at the time. Then maybe we could pick up the best forward available in the state leagues for immediate effect.