Training Ground?

[layzie 33,659]

21 minutes ago, Bowserpower said:

That would be much worse than where we were at the start of the week

About 50,000 volts worse if you know what I mean!

[58er 6,258]

17 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

2025-30 - we'll finish somewhere between 1 and 19, hopefully closer to 1

coffee

i think you missed my follow-up where i said how excited i am by this announcement, and that to get it fully built by 2030 would be a brilliant result for the club

That’s the spirit WSWS

[58er 6,258]

19 hours ago, Kent said:

Yes at Caufield races surrounded by problem gamblers who fund the joint

Completely ill informed comment. Won’t have a thing to do with the running of the MRC. 
No wonder your posting name is the same as one of our most disappointing players who didn’t succeed when we gave him licence to play with the Saints.  A wasted career unfortunately with both Clubs. 

[Mickey 4,599]

9 hours ago, waynewussell said:

The problem for you is that the majority here understand that getting a feasibility study ticked off is simply an acknowledgement by the major players that a specific proposal can be achieved. If it is not achieved because of a range of other roadblocks, it doesn’t mean the Board needs to be ejected. A large number here can see that the Caulfield option is one that would satisfy almost all of our needs regarding a home base. Would you prefer the Board take none of the prescribed actions for establishing such a base for fear of failure?

It seems like the majority, including me, absolutely understand that the feasibility study is just one step in the right direction. However, a number of board members, and this CEO, were brought on specifically to solve the home base problem. You can't honestly say that, if they have progressed this without a strong belief that it would go ahead, that they should stay?

It has taken all of 1 day for doubts to be raised about whether this goes ahead. Now, if this doubts are unfounded, happy days. I'm not saying their right or wrong. But if it does eventuate that this doesn't go ahead, after all the time and money spent, yes, I think Pert and the board should resign.

[Lucifers Hero 39,083]

I should point out a feasibility study cannot be a guarantee a project will happen.  

A feasibility study should have a detailed road-map to completion with several points of go/no-go decisions.  The email would have had more substance if a high level version was published indicating among other things, that there was support (at least in principle) from AFL, Racing, governments, community to undertake their responsibilities within the road-map time frames.

Having said that, I see no reason for anyone to resign as we simply won't know if he project goes ahead for a year or more.

Edited September 19 by Lucifers Hero

[58er 6,258]

12 minutes ago, Mickey said:

It seems like the majority, including me, absolutely understand that the feasibility study is just one step in the right direction. However, a number of board members, and this CEO, were brought on specifically to solve the home base problem. You can't honestly say that, if they have progressed this without a strong belief that it would go ahead, that they should stay?

It has taken all of 1 day for doubts to be raised about whether this goes ahead. Now, if this doubts are unfounded, happy days. I'm not saying their right or wrong. But if it does eventuate that this doesn't go ahead, after all the time and money spent, yes, I think Pert and the board should resign.

I must have missed something. 

Yes some have not been positive ( for reasons that they have been surprised that this is moving at (long) last.

Prey tell what’s the major reason that this project may not go ahead? 
Permits? Finance? Board ineptitude? 

In my mind many are sceptical and negative as they all don’t understand the depth of research and liability to all stakeholders to be cleared. 
so they just get general and throw darts about the place with no strength or science to further the their own scepticism and opinions of the recent past ( 5-10 years)delays due to location mainly. 

If we are to be judged on our reaction this week from Demonlanders to this most positive procedure indicating a YES and ongoing further advice on the next stage it would be lukewarm at best. All the naysayers and nitpickers are refusing to embrace this stage as a resounding plus on its journey 

Amazing after 190 pages of bluff and bluster plus the anger and discontent with the details and process and its delay and accusations and vehemence of sackings and resignations etc. 

In my opinion if this is an example of Club culture then we have failed miserably. In fact this wonderful forum has along with some other purposes now regressed into a whining winging and at large a very negative base for about 75% to bleat about the Club. The glass is about quarter full. 
If we keep persisting with this attitude there will be nothing left of the 3/4/5 years recently of success. Grown ups know that life is not all roses and that it produces thorns to be overcome. Part of that is HOW WE DO IT! 

And it has already started to turn around, yes we don’t know how Clarry will return and play Trac has his fitness and pre season to solve plus major decisions in trading drafting and coaching allocations are still to be made.

But we have only really lost ANB a hard replacement just like Gus. Who will step up and take care of our house keeping and team ethos and spirit? 
Leadership from the 5/6 should be more apparent not just Max and JV plus Rick  and Maysie. 

I don’t think we are going to go lower but we need a reset of our game plan and attitude of enjoying playing and bonding together for the team just like in 2021.  There was no real reason at the end of 2020 why we would win the Flag in 2021. Yes our defence started to produce good performances but the bonfire night helped remarkably to anoint a new playing culture and the result. 

AFL is so even at the moment that our 4 close losses by 10 points in total would have seen us on 15 - 8. Four more goals. 

Let’s be honest if we ever get our forward line up and going kicking goals we are shoe in for Top4. 

So it’s our/your choice Let’s restart in pre season and embrace positively our Club for this investment will payoff in spades during the season. And it starts with not throwing the dummy out of the cot and staying firm with MEMBERSHIP and ATTENDANCE at absolutely as many game as possible Not penalising the Club over something a 3 yo would cry about for 2 mins. And move on!!!

The choice is ours/yours let’s throw the angry pills away and Go Dees in 2025. 

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

On 18/09/2024 at 09:59, Demonland said:

 

Where's the bar?

Edited September 19 by Demon Dynasty

[Redleg 40,709]

13 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Where's the bar?

We are still setting it.

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

We are still setting it.

I hope this was said in good 'spirit' and you 'mulled' over it before having a bit of a 'wine' Mr Leg.

I would like to see some 'proof' at some point!

[Redleg 40,709]

6 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

I hope this was said in good 'spirit' and you 'mulled' over it before having a bit of a 'wine' Mr Leg.

I would like to see some 'proof' at some point!

It will come and be imbibed by the DL masses.

[layzie 33,659]

1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

I should point out a feasibility study cannot be a guarantee a project will happen.  

A feasibility study should have a detailed road-map to completion with several points of go/no-go decisions.  The email would have had more substance if a high level version was published indicating among other things, that there was support (at least in principle) from AFL, Racing, governments, community to undertake their responsibilities within the road-map time frames.

Having said that, I see no reason for anyone to resign as we simply won't know if he project goes ahead for a year or more.

My understanding of a feasibility study is it determines the likelihood of a project being completed successfully, weighing up the risk analysis and other critical aspects. Like how science never proves theories but supports them. Is that on the right track LH?

[ElDiablo14 4,990]

1 hour ago, layzie said:

My understanding of a feasibility study is it determines the likelihood of a project being completed successfully, weighing up the risk analysis and other critical aspects. Like how science never proves theories but supports them. Is that on the right track LH?

Feasibility studies in a manufacturing environment usually involves a customer - supplier study about the product to be delivered. High level review without being too technical, just enough.

In a nutshell it determines if that specific partnership can deliver on time, with quality and the expected production volumes.

My take on this is that this is MFC convincing the MRC and other key stakeholders that the project is feasible - sustainable.

 

[Dee Dee 1,105]

This whole thing is playing out like one of those old afternoon TV soap operas. Will it ever end?

Tune in next week same time same station for episode 5376 of Homeless,The never ending Quest!

[Redleg 40,709]

From my ignorant of procedures position I see 3 stages, first, permission and agreement of affected parties, second, detailing plans, costing and financing and third construction. 

I believe we have passed the first stage and have allowed about 9 months for the second.

I would think the third stage would take somewhere in the region of 12-24 months.

If this timetable is achieved, pre season 2028 would hopefully see it completed.

Edited September 20 by Redleg

[Adam The God 29,862]

5 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Having said that, I see no reason for anyone to resign as we simply won't know if he project goes ahead for a year or more.

That's the problem though. Pert's given himself another year by releasing a statement that has potentially had holes poked in it within 12 hours.

[58er 6,258]

8 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

That's the problem though. Pert's given himself another year by releasing a statement that has potentially had holes poked in it within 12 hours.

And what are the chief holes in it Adam that you can see? 
BTW a hole or part of the feasibility  has passed in my assumption all the stakeholders as of now. 

My take on that is that most of any small holes or potential are still able to tweaked. This is not a final document and many people in D/L from my observations over the last 5 years are mostly turning this into another opportunity to have a throw of a dart because they eitherdon’t agree on some details or are upset that they have been caught on the run with their time predictions that were blowing out this project date or forgot never to be completed in their lifetime. 

And based on the statement both Perty and Kate have done us proud, despite some posting of some doubt by some malcontents.

Clearly no other party in the Board has the running knowledge to take up this now and a compromise option is for another stage to be completed while the best chance of all is available for success. If anyone wants to challenge this so be it but it appears to be the best option and is fact. 

 

[Adam The God 29,862]

7 minutes ago, 58er said:

And what are the chief holes in it Adam that you can see? 
BTW a hole or part of the feasibility  has passed in my assumption all the stakeholders as of now. 

My take on that is that most of any small holes or potential are still able to tweaked. This is not a final document and many people in D/L from my observations over the last 5 years are mostly turning this into another opportunity to have a throw of a dart because they eitherdon’t agree on some details or are upset that they have been caught on the run with their time predictions that were blowing out this project date or forgot never to be completed in their lifetime. 

And based on the statement both Perty and Kate have done us proud, despite some posting of some doubt by some malcontents.

Clearly no other party in the Board has the running knowledge to take up this now and a compromise option is for another stage to be completed while the best chance of all is available for success. If anyone wants to challenge this so be it but it appears to be the best option and is fact. 

 

The holes are that it might not go ahead, and that's already the murmurs. Meanwhile, the feasibility study now gives way to a business case phase, which surely should have been apart of the last 12 months of [censored] around on the feasibility study...

Edited September 20 by Adam The God

[whatwhat say what 22,487]

32 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

That's the problem though. Pert's given himself another year by releasing a statement that has potentially had holes poked in it within 12 hours.

holes? as opposed to the 'not what i'm hearing' from 3aw? hearing from..?

this was always going to the process - the notion that it's 'had holes picked within it within 12 hours' and that releasing it has 'bought [someone] a year' is such a negative way of looking at the announcement

mfcss manifest, indeed

 

 

 

[Adam The God 29,862]

1 minute ago, whatwhat say what said:

holes? as opposed to the 'not what i'm hearing' from 3aw? hearing from..?

this was always going to the process - the notion that it's 'had holes picked within it within 12 hours' and that releasing it has 'bought [someone] a year' is such a negative way of looking at the announcement

mfcss manifest, indeed

 

 

 

I love how those who have lost trust in the admin are being painted. Oh, you're just suffering from MFCSS if you don't sit around clapping a dressed up update. Pert's been in the job five years and we've managed a 12 month feasibility study.

It's not MFCSS, it's MFCFMD.

[Hawk the Demon 885]

6 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

I should point out a feasibility study cannot be a guarantee a project will happen.  

A feasibility study should have a detailed road-map to completion with several points of go/no-go decisions.  The email would have had more substance if a high level version was published indicating among other things, that there was support (at least in principle) from AFL, Racing, governments, community to undertake their responsibilities within the road-map time frames.

Having said that, I see no reason for anyone to resign as we simply won't know if he project goes ahead for a year or more.

So no-one should resign? So no accountability for the CEO who has been there since 2018 and penned a 4-year strategic plan suggesting construction commencement in the MCG precinct in 2023? There may be good reasons why that didn't/hasn't happened, but the members haven't been told? Is that possibility officially dead? - I suspect Yes. Please tell us - or is the MCG precinct  Plan B? Any of this home base failure part of the external reviews going on?

Perhaps not - because one review is of the Board itself and most of them have been there 3 years or less (so can claim the last plan wasn't theirs). And the other review is of the football department. Guess who isn't specifically being reviewed?

[whatwhat say what 22,487]

6 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

I love how those who have lost trust in the admin are being painted. Oh, you're just suffering from MFCSS if you don't sit around clapping a dressed up update. Pert's been in the job five years and we've managed a 12 month feasibility study.

It's not MFCSS, it's MFCFMD.

but i don't understand why you expected it to be any different

they said this time last year the feasibility study was expected to take the majority of the 2024 year

an announcement has now been made of next steps

the way you automatically assume the worst outcome is mfcss to which i can only aspire; i'm not that hardwired to negativity

i say 'we'll see'

i have hope, which i think as a football fan is what you want, rather than going full hanrahan - "we'll all be rooned!"

 

[58er 6,258]

6 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

The holes are that it might not go ahead, and that's already the murmurs. Meanwhile, the feasibility study now gives way to a business case phase, which surely should have been apart of the last 12 months of [censored] around on the feasibility study...

And where are  these murmurs coming from ? Informed stakeholders ? Biased D/Lers with gripes as I outlined. 
Govr people in the know ? Not someone from ???! 
Scuttlebut ?? 
Stirrers dissatisfied with the process like you? What expert tile do these people have and if it’s a one off what’s wrong. 

Please enlighten me .

And as stability in this project is vital it’s undoubtedly an advantage to keep informed and appropriate personnel involved. 

Unless you have changed your post name recently I don’t recall you on this forum until fairly recently so I have reservations about you post and opinions which are mostly negative and trifling at best. 

Of course it might not go ahead at Caulfield but seems after such a location search of 5 years we should be urging this vital project to go ahead unless any major reasons are mounted against its existence. 

That has not  been done IMO with mostly cheap shots trying to undermine the next stage and existing proof of our Club with positivity and feasibility established after many months of hard work. 
 

[Adam The God 29,862]

4 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

but i don't understand why you expected it to be any different

they said this time last year the feasibility study was expected to take the majority of the 2024 year

an announcement has now been made of next steps

the way you automatically assume the worst outcome is mfcss to which i can only aspire; i'm not that hardwired to negativity

i say 'we'll see'

i have hope, which i think as a football fan is what you want, rather than going full hanrahan - "we'll all be rooned!"

 

You're right, you don't understand where I'm coming from mate.

I do not trust Pert or the board. They've given too many reasons not to trust them, which have been provided ad nuseum by myself and others on Demonland.

Pert and co have had a major job to do over 5+ years and have managed a 12 month feasibility study that doesn't even apparently include the financials and the business case. It's not good enough. It's not MFCSS to suggest by their own markers, the progress has been treacle slow.

[58er 6,258]

19 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

I love how those who have lost trust in the admin are being painted. Oh, you're just suffering from MFCSS if you don't sit around clapping a dressed up update. Pert's been in the job five years and we've managed a 12 month feasibility study.

It's not MFCSS, it's MFCFMD.

You do know the real location has not been the chosen one until very recently. Probably a newcomer like you to this longed for base for our Club. Rome was not built in a day and developments like this are an example.

Please check how long the Hawks hav had Dingley as their location. You may learn something on builds like theirs and ours. 

[daisycutter 29,563]

2 minutes ago, 58er said:

 

Unless you have changed your post name recently I don’t recall you on this forum until fairly recently so I have reservations about you post and opinions which are mostly negative and trifling at best. 

 

 

click on person's avatar picture

on profile ,just to right of profile name is a little circle with an arrow on the end

hover over that and you will see poster's previous profile names