Goodbye Noah Anderson 

Christ Melbourne supporters are embarrassing.

17 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

I expect us to sit back and say nothing.

Nothing we can do, had a [censored] house year just hope its not the norm.

I am sooooooo $*&#(^ p*@@#$ off right now.

All in the AFL should be sacked.

The AFL are an absoloute joke, how teams allow the AFL rule over them is as weak as p(**

That so called meeting we had with the scum, went something along the lines of "hay melbourne, we need to dif gc out of the heap they have become, because we stuffed up, bringing them in, in the first place.

So since this year you are on the bottom of the ladder and will agree to anything we want, we will be gifting gc all we can"

"Oh and by the way it's such a shame you didn't win this years gf, because we could have given that to them as well".

"How are things by the way" ? "Well" "good, good, well see your selves out wouldd you then"?

9 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Christ Melbourne supporters are embarrassing.

For supporting the club or for constantly putting the boot into it whenever even half an opportunity arises?  I trust the latter group are all going to nominate for the Board and sort things out for us.

In the "echelons", not many people were happy with this sh## show, hence the heavy hand of help was imminent.Up until then MFC could have RIGHTLY expected their fair picks, so i suppose now instead of us getting NT we get "sewer city", and the AFL looking more and more stupid have bigger cracks appearing.........

29 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

I'm not glossing over. I just don't care. The root of the problem here is wholeheartedly to do with the state of our club at present and also over the past decade or so.

The tweaking, changing or creating of rules wouldn't be a talking point for Melbourne supporters if we were consistently challenging for finals as was predicted at this point of our rebuild. We finished second last this year, so of course supporters need to direct their anger and frustration somewhere. 

'steve', this goes back a long way.

Other clubs passed us by as professional organisations in the 60's/70's...

It cost us dearly.

The AFL gifted some clubs great zones to pull their premierships and current successes from eg: Hawthorn

Now they've reintroduced zones that are again being manipulated.

We lost the MCG as our home ground and training base.

We are the only AFL club without a home and our training facilities are again falling behind industry standard.

What can we do?

Nail the pick as you've stated but that's just a small part of it.

If we don't get up off the ground and start getting some wins on the board then we will lose the likes Max and Clarry when better offers come from the big successful clubs and I wouldn't blame them.

The AFL should have just given them a 10 goal start in every game. 

I agree with Steve here.  We haven't done ourselves any favours in the past and we can't blame the AFL for that.

Also, moving down one spot in the draft is meaningless.  It's been discussed here many times how often the gun players don't end up coming from the pointy end of the draft (with a few exceptions).

The onus is on the club to draft well, trade well and then develop well to get us back to where we should be, regardless of what picks we have to play with and the order they are in.

The problem I have with the AFL is that is makes up its policy on the run. There is no consistency in its decision-making and no accountability. This effectively diminishes the competition and turns it into another form of entertainment much like professional wrestling. How long before we just don’t regard it as a sport any more?

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Why would you use the same thought process? 

One is the newest AFL club trying to establish itself in Rugby's heartland and they're under ten years old as a club. Clearly they're going to need help if the AFL want to grow the game nationally, which is obviously the point here. Of course that's not to say the club figureheads need to take some responsibility for the way things have panned out, but what's the alternative? They don't have one and they need assistance from the AFL until a solid foundation is there.

Compare that to us, the oldest sporting club in world's history, still relying on the AFL for financial assistance, received a priority pick as recently as 2009 and asked for another one which was rejected as recently as 2014. That's five years ago. Think about that for a minute. Our club started the AFL.

Without wanting to sound condescending, the 'logic' you speak of is completely absent in your post, not mine. 

Comparing the two and using the same thought process is where you've gone wrong. 

Well you have lost me now, why would you just ignore the fact that they have had more than enough talent but have chosen to trade some of it away. Sure they need to do well, but its not like they don't have any young talent coming through. They had 4 top 10 picks just 3 years ago and had 3 top 6 picks last year. They are not lacking young talent coming through. 

The fact the AFL has included the part where it  "retains the right to remove future picks and / or academy access based on the club’s performance" shows they really do have no idea. They might need assistance but they don't need all these draft picks, they need the right people in the right positions at the club.

They are rumoured to be picking up Ellis, Crouch and Greenwood in this upcoming trade period. They will quickly overtake us if they retain the players from the last 4 drafts.

 

2 hours ago, Gipsy Danger said:

Expansion clubs really have screwed us. There really was no worse time to bottom out than when they came in and the AFL gave them everything.

actually come to think of it, every expansion club coming in since 1859 has screwed us

Richmond and Footscray both bottomed out at that time as well.

I am ok with Suns getting priority pick and other draft concessions. AFL took their eye off the ball, and now we have to pay the price.

We need to fix ourselves.

 

45 minutes ago, sue said:

For supporting the club or for constantly putting the boot into it whenever even half an opportunity arises?  I trust the latter group are all going to nominate for the Board and sort things out for us.

If stating that "we have nobody but ourselves to blame for where were are now" is sticking the boots in then hip-hop hurray.

I'm sorry to offend by stating facts.

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

I'm not glossing over. I just don't care. The root of the problem here is wholeheartedly to do with the state of our club at present and also over the past decade or so.

The tweaking, changing or creating of rules wouldn't be a talking point for Melbourne supporters if we were consistently challenging for finals as was predicted at this point of our rebuild. We finished second last this year, so of course supporters need to direct their anger and frustration somewhere. 

Yes, like I said I agree with your points.

What I'm saying is that there are issues with the fairness of the competition which can make governing clubs difficult. If you're a bottom feeder like us - where are the resources coming from to be best practice? To employ the best people in the industry?

I am not sure there would be too many leagues in the world where the governing body have such a big say in the day to day running of club land, player contracts, compensation etc... Even the Free agency rules are heavily weighted in unfairness to clubs.

Rules vary from year to year in every facet of the competition.

How many high end FAs end up at bottom clubs? I personally don't think it is that simple to just fix administration. But I 100% agree with your points it plays a huge part in making the competition work for you. The competition doesn't make it easy for teams who don't have massive following/money/influence.

 

Edited September 30, 20195 yr by Unleash Hell

5 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

If stating that "we have nobody but ourselves to blame for where were are now" is sticking the boots in then hip-hop hurray.

I'm sorry to offend by stating facts.

It is also a fact that there are a number of people on here who can't resist putting the boot into the club whenever they get half a chance.  I'd like to see them nominate for the Board except they rarely offer solutions other than the bleeding obvious. Would you vote for any of them?

Got my popcorn ready for when @olisik hears about this development

Edited September 30, 20195 yr by ding

23 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

The problem I have with the AFL is that is makes up its policy on the run. There is no consistency in its decision-making and no accountability. This effectively diminishes the competition and turns it into another form of entertainment much like professional wrestling. How long before we just don’t regard it as a sport any more?

It's hard not to when things don't go to plan, is it not?

I mean, clearly in an ideal world the Gold Coast would be challenging just like GWS right now. 

But [censored] happens. There were failings at board level through to coaching and then the player group fell apart as a ripple effect. And the people holding those positions were absolutely held to account. They were sacked! 

I'm not sure why everyone just assumes that all was going to be completely rosey when introducing two new teams.

How in the world do some Melbourne supporters have so much patience for their own club's ineptitude, willing to defend it to the line yet will crack the sads with a click of the fingers when the AFL have to help an expansion club eight years into its inception.

Trying to grow a game, introduce two new AFL teams into non-AFL supporting environments means there'll be inconsistency in rules, give outs and policy. 

It's just the way it goes, I don't understand what people expect? 

2 hours ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

no, they didn't

• pick 2 - cotchin
• pick 3 - martin
• pick 13 - jack riewoldt

Petracca Brayshaw Oliver Weideman

This is such a Melbourne thing to happen lol

14 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

 

It's just the way it goes, I don't understand what people expect? 

I think to best sum it up for me it's,

Gold Coast were rewarded for poor management. I get they need help, but the help should be even across the competition for the same circumstances.

What they've received is a competitive advantage. But we all know the draft isn't an automatic path to success.

People have been following this club for years, and we have been a basket case for decades. I don't blame people for getting upset and asking when is it our turn?

Why should the "new" club get a competitive advantage over a club that has existed from the start? What other competition allows for such variations in rules?

Don't get me wrong, I really do agree with your points, but people have a right to be [censored] off with AFL house.

 

Just to be clear... im not talking about the MFC should get priority picks, im just talking about the fairness or lack of in the AFL rules from year to year.

Edited September 30, 20195 yr by Unleash Hell

6 minutes ago, sue said:

It is also a fact that there are a number of people on here who can't resist putting the boot into the club whenever they get half a chance.  I'd like to see them nominate for the Board except they rarely offer solutions other than the bleeding obvious. Would you vote for any of them?

 

Well I'm not entirely sure who you're alluding to. I know over the journey I have been extremely critical of list management and recruitment decisions. 

Maybe supporters can vote me in to a recruiting role or something, I don't know? 

2 hours ago, MrMoose said:

-MICHAEL WARNER

Footy's $250m disaster club (Gold Coast) has been handed an extraordinary three-year national draft rescue package.

The Gold Coast Suns will have picks No.1 and 2 in November's draft, as well as the first pick in the second round, currently pick No.20.

In next year's draft, they'll get a mid-first-round pick, currently pick 11 and in 2021 they will get the first pick in the second round, currently 19

The move hands the two best prospects in the country, young guns Matt Rowell and Noah Anderson, to the Suns on a platter.

It means at least three more years of compromised drafts to assist the battling expansion club.

Every draft is compromised due to academy picks, father sons and now priority picks. This makes no difference to that

2 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Why would you use the same thought process? 

One is the newest AFL club trying to establish itself in Rugby's heartland and they're under ten years old as a club. Clearly they're going to need help if the AFL want to grow the game nationally, which is obviously the point here. Of course that's not to say the club figureheads need to take some responsibility for the way things have panned out, but what's the alternative? They don't have one and they need assistance from the AFL until a solid foundation is there.

Compare that to us, the oldest sporting club in world's history, still relying on the AFL for financial assistance, received a priority pick as recently as 2009 and asked for another one which was rejected as recently as 2014. That's five years ago. Think about that for a minute. Our club started the AFL.

Without wanting to sound condescending, the 'logic' you speak of is completely absent in your post, not mine. 

Comparing the two and using the same thought process is where you've gone wrong. 

Not to mention we made a Prelim last year and wouldn't have qualified for a PP under the afls previous rules.

This isn't about Melbourne, it's about the game and the competition. This decision will not be the difference between us being successful or not and if we think it is then that's part of the problem.

2 hours ago, jumbo returns said:

Geelong, Collingwood, Richmond

Errr......the fuchsias?

Correct bar 2 clubs, remember he coached in the SANFL.