The article is fine if a month or two out of date.

@Demonland

We will cop flak from the masses no matter what. While I doubt the more honest media players will bring it up, there were rumblings among certain opposition nuff nuffs (mostly Essendon supporters which wasn't surprising) about how we didn't deserve any success because we had tanked our way to the top. This is despite the fact that that most of the draft picks of that time had been moved on (traded, delisted or moved on for an array of reasons).

As Denis Pagan says, if you are in the business then you are bound to be criticized. We just have to wear it and make them eat their words.

Better this week, then next. 

Nothing wrong with that article. She's right. Season goes well, it will be forgotten.

 

If we show mental weakness (round23) it will come up again.

Caro at her best. I wasn't one of the people who thought the sky was falling on this issue, but I couldn't deny that it was a bad look.

Caro has got her ducks in a line and discussed the issues and points of views from all parties involved.

I couldn't care less that it was late. I would much rather read an article like this than read the usual [censored] the HUN produces which just recycles the same quotes over and over. Its pretty rare these days that I open up an article from the HUN that contains any more detailed information than the headline contains.

The media have got their narrative for our season ready. Pump us up in preseason. Beat St. Kilda by 20points- they’re flying!

When we stumble they will go back to this camp story and try to destabilise us saying the players are steering the ship. 

Up to us to prove everyone wrong. 

6 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

It would have been interesting about two months ago.

Anything! that fires up our supporters, is great for us... as it also raises the hackles of our senior players.  How much more motivation do we need to get angry 'for' the footy.

 

So we are "soft", great; now lets open the show, and see our royal softness go royally hard.

Like others, I wonder at the timing. The way the news cycle operates these days, the story is ancient history and, as a consequence, has no impact.

Sadly for the Age, it’s a sign of the times and yet another example of a once great newspaper on the decline.

is she that desperate for attention?! whyyyyy? to unsettle the club and rattle the supporters? bit late.. i agree w others posters. this was needed at the time, not a year later or 2 mths after the last update on the events. 

10 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Like others, I wonder at the timing. The way the news cycle operates these days, the story is ancient history and, as a consequence, has no impact.

Sadly for the Age, it’s a sign of the times and yet another example of a once great newspaper on the decline.

Agree, just cancelled my subscription......

4 hours ago, MurDoc516 said:

It's going to be brought up every time we lose. So i suggest we just don't lose >:]

If we lose the type of games when we go in as solid favourites like we have done consistently in the past couple of seasons it will happen and loudly too. Either nothing will change or we will be rid of that soft tag this season. 

If I went to a work retreat where a colleague dislocated a kneecap and another concussed himself with a 'backpack brick' then I would expect the leaders of that organisation to know that that would have repercussions.

From that article, the only positives I got was Nathan Jones once again is a leader amongst passives and that this thing didn't happen...

We move on, but apparently some at the club haven't. Own it, and move on FFS.

5 hours ago, pitmaster said:

If we show mental weakness (round23) it will come up again.

Which we will.
'Cause we are.

 

 

2 hours ago, DV8 said:

So we are "soft", great; now lets open the show, and see our royal softness go royally hard.

Early part of last year we were as hard as anybody.
Problem is our inability to keep it going for the duration of the season.
 

It’s going to be brought up the moment results turn south. Caro writing an article on the eve of the season plays no part in that. It’s going to happen.

I’m not her biggest fan but I side with those who thought it was a balanced and informative piece. Just try to imagine the dribble Robbo would’ve written if given the opportunity.

Seriously, what is a journalist who knows practically nothing about the actual game of Aussie Rules going to write about?

I have never seen a single article from Caro about a game of footy. The on field stuff i mean. This sort of piece is her stock-in-trade.

We either prove to the football world that missing the camp didn't hurt our football ability, or we fuel the fire.

The ball is in our court, the same way it has been since the game was invented.

GO DEES!

 

15 hours ago, hemingway said:

She must need to satisfy her contractural obligations of X number of articles per month. She no doubt wrote notes to herself during the summer of what would be good copy when she returned. 

Anyway, Caro is back doing what she does best. Raking over old coals, dramatizing the facts (including a few of her own special comments and references to sources), placing a slant on the story, and coming to a conclusion that is always qualified. 

But she is very skilled at it, and it makes a good read.  

Yep, balanced and some insight yet way out of date; quite questionable in raising these alleged issues at this point of the coming season, other than to disrupt and destabilise what has been a remarkably successful pre-season. 

16 hours ago, Canplay said:

Just feels a very dated story with no new insight -  not sure why it needs re-hashing at this time

She probably just got back from Xmas break.

Many posters are questioning the timing of the article, which I understand, but I suspect it's because some of the pertinent details of the saga have only recently come to light.  With the passage of time details are more likely to surface.  

Good article, but the timing of it is horrible. Just comes off as a nothing article given the fact this topic is in the rear view mirror.

10 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Like others, I wonder at the timing. The way the news cycle operates these days, the story is ancient history and, as a consequence, has no impact.

Sadly for the Age, it’s a sign of the times and yet another example of a once great newspaper on the decline.

 

19 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

She probably just got back from Xmas break.

Too much has been written into the timing of the article.

It's not a conspiracy or a particular dig at us.

I don't see the article as out of date, it's very current given the season is now upon us and the expectations on our team. Have we learned from the experience? are there any residual resentments? how will our players & FD respond when under pressure? These questions and many more will only be answered in the season/s ahead kicking off this week.

Further to the timing 'Gonzo' is close to the mark, although his comment was probably in jest.

Caroline has retired, she no longer works in the day to day footy media hustle, bustle & will write a weekly feature piece during the season to keep her hand in.

On the cusp of season 2018 in her field of expertise this is a good a topic for her to kick off with.

I don’t give a stuff what Caro says regarding the MFC & SAS training. Your an idiot if you bring a pen to a street fight - footy is not played on paper. 

9 hours ago, rpfc said:

If I went to a work retreat where a colleague dislocated a kneecap and another concussed himself with a 'backpack brick' then I would expect the leaders of that organisation to know that that would have repercussions.

From that article, the only positives I got was Nathan Jones once again is a leader amongst passives and that this thing didn't happen...

We move on, but apparently some at the club haven't. Own it, and move on FFS.

While I agree in principle with your points, if they were acted out in the reality you speak of then no players in the AFL would play games because of the risk of injury while playing games, all of the public scrutiny hurting their feelings etc. It makes no sense for AFL purposes

Fact is AFL players have to accept certain realities in their AFL career, eg, higher risk of injury, shorter careers for most, high public scrutiny etc. which is all compensated with extremely high wages for their troubles.

While I respect the AFLPA are representing player interests, you need to see or at least acknowledge the bigger picture as well. The AFL isn't easy, it's designed to weed out the weak. 

If you acknowledge what Ballamy has to say, it sounds like the camp is a training tool and not a cornerstone of preseason. Why and how is the camp seen as acceptable for an NRL club but not an AFL club? Are AFL clubs softer? Or is something else going on?

Hopefully the MFC have acknowledged the room for improvement in player wellbeing and welfare but for the AFLPA to step in over a 2 day camp is pretty laughable, and while not being sensitive the scrutiny on the club and players is worthy.

 

In saying all that, the saga it is an interesting debate and interesting look at the dynamic of club and players. And relationships in the club we don't normally see.

I personally don't believe it will have a massive affect on the season, and I think the soft tag will motivate some players more and with the added desire to perform hopefully that bodes well for the season ahead. 

 

11 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Like others, I wonder at the timing. The way the news cycle operates these days, the story is ancient history and, as a consequence, has no impact.

Sadly for the Age, it’s a sign of the times and yet another example of a once great newspaper on the decline.

Correct, what we need to know is how Richmond won a flag without doing the camp and why Hardwick didn't deem it necessary for his players?

It was a stupid idea in the first place and to do it again was even more stupid. Rugby players are totally different to AFL players and if Bellamy feels it is right for his players that's ok, they are different body shapes to our guys and what suits one code doesn't necessarily suit another.

The real storey should have been written last year as to why we did such a stupid thing and came out of it with two injured players.

6 minutes ago, Dante said:

Correct, what we need to know is how Richmond won a flag without doing the camp and why Hardwick didn't deem it necessary for his players?

It was a stupid idea in the first place and to do it again was even more stupid. Rugby players are totally different to AFL players and if Bellamy feels it is right for his players that's ok, they are different body shapes to our guys and what suits one code doesn't necessarily suit another.

The real storey should have been written last year as to why we did such a stupid thing and came out of it with two injured players.

In the article Bellamy actually says it has little to do with physical training.... 

‘‘The camp helps us see how these players are going to fit into our club,’’ said Bellamy. ‘‘To be quite honest, the IDQ guys are not always right but over 15 years they haven’t been wrong too often.’’

‘‘I spoke to Simon Goodwin and Brendan McCartney about it and explained the camp helps us see how guys react working under pressure and fatigue with teammates. It is a way for me to get information about my players and their strengths and weaknesses so we can help them improve. It’s more of a mentally taxing exercise than physical.’’

Like her or not Caro's article does raise some good points... maybe the spoon fed AFL media is right about the Demons being mentally soft afterall

I think the article is fair and to me it highlights the ALFPA's (interfering) role.  I don't take the article as a slight on mfc or anyone at the club.

 

On a different note -

I found it amusing that the camp is (ironically) called 'I Don't Quit' (IDQ). 

I just hope we learnt the 'I Don't Quit' lesson some other way in the preseason so we play 120 minutes each week.  Too many players switch off for too long during games and leave too much work to too few.  Blink and the quarter and often the game is gone.

Only time will tell if we have have embraced the 'IDQ' mindset.

43 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

In the article Bellamy actually says it has little to do with physical training.... 

‘‘The camp helps us see how these players are going to fit into our club,’’ said Bellamy. ‘‘To be quite honest, the IDQ guys are not always right but over 15 years they haven’t been wrong too often.’’

‘‘I spoke to Simon Goodwin and Brendan McCartney about it and explained the camp helps us see how guys react working under pressure and fatigue with teammates. It is a way for me to get information about my players and their strengths and weaknesses so we can help them improve. It’s more of a mentally taxing exercise than physical.’’

Like her or not Caro's article does raise some good points... maybe the spoon fed AFL media is right about the Demons being mentally soft afterall

You left this bit out, most of our players did this last year, so why the need to send them again? Wilson saw how we played against them last year and we were on top until we got some injuries to key players, don't be fooled by her, she would do anything to destabilise us. Expect more negativity about us from her.

Soft? How many other teams have completed this course?

generally Bellamy only sends first-year players or older recruits new to the Storm on the camp.