12 minutes ago, stuie said:

Missing the point of a post where I'm explaining how another posters missed the point... Congratulations, you win derp of the week.

 

I haven't missed the point at all. 

6 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:

We should have a meeting of true believers.

Is the Duke too small?

Bbub you have more connections.

D'Landers need to have a night out with a common theme

No Drugs. Beer & Wine allowed.  LOL.

 

Sounds good. Not back in Oz for two weeks however.

Might need to revise that no beer, no wine ; unless it's straight to the top shelf

6 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Again, I think you can only conclusively call the trade a mistake if you look at the first year of his contract in isolation and discount all the possibilities for years 2, 3, 4 and beyond. 

sorry nasher, didn't pass the sniff test. never did. throwback to the bad old days of list management

11 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

We used pick 34 on Max Gawn who had done his ACL the previous season. He was untried at AFL level and a massive unit which could only put extra pressure on his knees. 

Sometimes you need to take educated risks.

 

I had this exact example lined up and ready to go in a previous post but left it out in the end. Obviously the club saw the reward as being worth the risks. No different here.

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

sorry nasher, didn't pass the sniff test. never did. throwback to the bad old days of list management

In that case, we might as well just delist him now if we've already decided the whole trade is a bust. 

Just now, Nasher said:

In that case, we might as well just delist him now if we've already decided the whole trade is a bust. 

that would be quite an expensive exercise, nasher - 3 x $400k potentially, down the drain 

 

19 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Again, I think you can only conclusively call the trade a mistake if you look at the first year of his contract in isolation and discount all the possibilities for years 2, 3, 4 and beyond. 

The fact he has a 4 year deal at least gives him the time to turn it around. Using the word "mistake" may have jumped the gun, but it is a horrible start to life at his new club, and I think there is now extra pressure on himself, and also Goodwin, that he hits the ground running in 2017.

5 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

that would be quite an expensive exercise, nasher - 3 x $400k potentially, down the drain 

 

It's already down the drain by the sounds of it.

Statement on Jake Melksham from the MFC

30 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Go over to Bomberblitz...they'll welcome you.

How about you see it for what it IS, not for your sugary ideal.

Players and a club got caught doing wrong. You're right in respect to a notion of simplicity.

They did wrong. Simple

 

25 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Take your opinions to James Hird ot me. 

Nobody tied these players down and forced Hyperdemic Needles in their arms. 

Signatures were written down by players who obviously did little research en masse

quite simple really. Don't sign your name unless you are dead sure...

Ok, I'll put it more simply for you two so you can keep up.

I'm not defending anyone. I'm not saying the players didn't do anything wrong. They did wrong, they've been banned. You can either keep going over the same points you've been making for the last 12 months and repeat your same tired opinions (you two are experts at that), or you can take it to a NEW discussion about the implications this has on footy, club culture, leadership trust etc...

Now I know you two are the resident angry old fist-shakers, but how about we talk about implications and where this takes footy rather than go over the same stuff ad nauseam.

Or just keep going as you like so you can get your post count up and listen to yourselves speak.

 

Personally I don't think Taylor, Mahoney, Viney, Roos, Goodwin or Jackson are naive or stupid.

They would have been well aware of this possible scenario. They have taken a long term view.

 

3 hours ago, demon-4-life said:

Just saw on his Twitter that Jake and his partner welcomed a baby girl less than a week ago.

I'm a glass half full guy.  Jake gets more time to bond with his daughter.  More important things than kicking a bit of leather around on some grass.

oh ffs

5 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

Ok, I'll put it more simply for you two so you can keep up.

I'm not defending anyone. I'm not saying the players didn't do anything wrong. They did wrong, they've been banned. You can either keep going over the same points you've been making for the last 12 months and repeat your same tired opinions (you two are experts at that), or you can take it to a NEW discussion about the implications this has on footy, club culture, leadership trust etc...

Now I know you two are the resident angry old fist-shakers, but how about we talk about implications and where this takes footy rather than go over the same stuff ad nauseam.

Or just keep going as you like so you can get your post count up and listen to yourselves speak.

 

I think one thing is for sure and that is the players will consult with their managers and the PA at a minimum in the future and that phrases like "cutting edge" should automatically raise a red flag.

I still find it hard to believe no player from the EFC raised this program with their managers or the PA though 'stuie' but if they didn't then the club did a very good sell and the peer group pressure must have been huge.

There is nothing new in todays decision but at least in the future players should finally realise they are not above the laws and the AFL &/or their clubs cannot always bail them out.

Personal responsibility is a phrase that resonates with me.

2 hours ago, stuie said:

So out of curiosity, how many of those saying this is now a disastrous trade would have expected pick 25 in a weak draft to be a regular 22 player in their first year?

We've got at least 2 experienced AFL people at our club who would have known what went on at Essendon and that Melksham would likely miss a year, so not sure why everyone is acting like we were blindsided by this. Although those people are probably the same ones who were bagging out Mahoney at the start of the trade period without realizing there was a bigger picture.

 

Oh come off it! As if YOU know anything more than the rest of us! I think you are completely deluding yourself if you think the club was expecting this to happen, they had no idea I reckon.

Go start a new thread Stuie...if you want to talk about that.

Here we discuss the guilt and complicity of the Essendon players and the club.

Just now, rjay said:

I think one thing is for sure and that is the players will consult with their managers and the PA at a minimum in the future and that phrases like "cutting edge" should automatically raise a red flag.

I still find it hard to believe no player from the EFC raised this program with their managers or the PA though 'stuie' but if they didn't then the club did a very good sell and the peer group pressure must have been huge.

There is nothing new in todays decision but at least in the future players should finally realise they are not above the laws and the AFL &/or their clubs cannot always bail them out.

Personal responsibility is a phrase that resonates with me.

To me it just feels like a watershed moment for footy club culture as far as peer group pressure v personal responsibility and leadership trust v individual careers. I can't remember another time like this where the trust of players has been so comprehensively destroyed. Footy players everywhere will see the players being banned and not avoiding responsibility and it will change the dynamic of the group think and blind trust in leadership that as been a hallmark of clubland since footy began.

 

13 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

Ok, I'll put it more simply for you two so you can keep up.

I'm not defending anyone. I'm not saying the players didn't do anything wrong. They did wrong, they've been banned. You can either keep going over the same points you've been making for the last 12 months and repeat your same tired opinions (you two are experts at that), or you can take it to a NEW discussion about the implications this has on footy, club culture, leadership trust etc...

Now I know you two are the resident angry old fist-shakers, but how about we talk about implications and where this takes footy rather than go over the same stuff ad nauseam.

Or just keep going as you like so you can get your post count up and listen to yourselves speak.

 

What a load of drivel. 

Club Culture going forward should be a lot more transparent. 

You get better with fitness and training. 

The AFL needs to be run more professionally and not an incestuous Boys Club who had no wish to co operate with WADA..They just had too....

is this the sort of convo you were after Stuie

rather basic principles really...

1 minute ago, beelzebub said:

Go start a new thread Stuie...if you want to talk about that.

Here we discuss the guilt and complicity of the Essendon players and the club.

Really? Do you actually remember what this thread is about? (Here's a hint: check out the title of it)

 

4 minutes ago, Curry & Beer said:

Oh come off it! As if YOU know anything more than the rest of us! I think you are completely deluding yourself if you think the club was expecting this to happen, they had no idea I reckon.

4 year contract.

Also:

Melbourne Coach Paul Roos said: “Jake was recruited to our Club for the long term."

But yeah, I'm sure it's totally caught them by surprise....

 

1 minute ago, stuie said:

Really? Do you actually remember what this thread is about? (Here's a hint: check out the title of it)

 

A Guilty player that was recruited to the MFC...

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

A Guilty player that was recruited to the MFC...

Maybe tell your mate Bub that.

 

17 minutes ago, GM11 said:

Personally I don't think Taylor, Mahoney, Viney, Roos, Goodwin or Jackson are naive or stupid.

They would have been well aware of this possible scenario. They have taken a long term view.

 

Spot. On.

Melbourne Coach Paul Roos said: “Jake was recruited to our Club for the long term."

 

34 minutes ago, Nasher said:

It's already down the drain by the sounds of it.

nasher, it's is very easy to rationalise almost anything (go on bomberblitz) and easy to find a siver-lining in every dark cloud. we now have to live with the mistake and i hope we can salvage some good out of it

but none of that should distract from the fact that the decision to trade for milkshake with a low 2nd rounder and a good salary, was, in the conditions of a pending wada appeal, a bad decision. a snafu

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

nasher, it's is very easy to rationalise almost anything (go on bomberblitz) and easy to find a siver-lining in every dark cloud. we now have to live with the mistake and i hope we can salvage some good out of it

but none of that should distract from the fact that the decision to trade for milkshake with a low 2nd rounder and a good salary, was, in the conditions of a pending wada appeal, a bad decision. a snafu

You know his salary how exactly?

 

28 minutes ago, stuie said:

4 year contract.

Also:

Melbourne Coach Paul Roos said: “Jake was recruited to our Club for the long term."

But yeah, I'm sure it's totally caught them by surprise....

 

that doesn't go anywhere near backing up your contention and you know it