Leaderboard

Many of the kids I teach give me grief over supporting Melbourne. Of course I obtain revenge by downgrading their marks and writing them poor reports.

It goes to the very heart of what this is about.It means that there is a difference between the legal interpretation of tanking and its popularly held meaning. The AFL has a rule that defines tanking and the rule has been explained from time to time by the AFL and more particularly by Andrew Demetriou himself as having a narrow meaning which excludes such things as list management and experimental positioning of players. That is what I consider to be the AFL's law regarding tanking . That law can't be retrospectively changed in 2013 to apply to a set of circumstances that prevailed in 2009, 2007 or any other year. On that basis, I don't believe we can be charged unless the coach instructed his players to do things during a game which would minimise our chances of winning. Quite apart from the questionable investigation techniques applied by the AFL's people, this would ultimately see any case against us, thrown out by a court of law (if it ever came to that). In fact, there is only one instance of tanking that I believe can be proven and that is against Richmond, which by Terry Wallace's admission, gained a priority draft pick as a result of him not making moves to win a game against St. Kilda in 2007 i.e he did not allow his team to play on its merits. The AFL however, has failed to investigate or charge either the Tigers or Wallace. There have been other claims of tanking against several other clubs over the past decade or so but the AFL hasn't taken these seriously either and, as a result, it's my view that the AFL's tanking rules are bad law and need to be reviewed. There is a disconnect between the L-A-W (where have I heard that before?) and the public perception of tanking which is what 99% of the population (including you) consider tanking to be - that is the much wider view which included experimenting with player positioning, unusual tactics and dropping players or sending them off for early surgery. If that's your definition of "tanking" then a dozen clubs including us have tanked in one way or another going back to Fremantle in 1999 all the way to the AFL love child GWS in 2012. Back in 2009, I supported the idea that we should do whatever was in our power to collect the priority draft pick. I still found it repugnant that the AFL put the temptation in front of us but, we're all mortals and we ate the forbidden (but very legal) fruit.

The tanking debate will continue for some weeks to come and I think it will continue beyond the time of the resolution of the current investigation. Watching the Oprah interview of Lance Armstrong, I couldn't help but wonder why cycling authorities the world over allowed their sport to degenerate to its current low point. Lou Sweeney sums it up in The Lance and Oprah Show: "I pretty much knew already you couldn't ride a bike up a mountain at full tilt for three weeks on just a muesli bar and Jesus." We knew the evils that beset the sport and cycling authorities took on and conquered some offenders but Armstrong, who was suspected of drug cheating by some commentators, was given free rein for too long a time. There are some who are now suggesting that cycling be removed from the Olympics. It's also a bit reminiscent of prohibition and marihuana laws. They were brought in for a reason but they didn't quite work and the way in which they were enforced led to accusations of corruption by authorities. Now we have this investigation where one club has been chosen as the target for investigation when we know that the relevant rule has been and continues to be breached by other clubs whose activities have been ignored. GWS dropped 10 players one week in 2012 and were rewarded with Lauchie Whitfield but this was OK; the coach apparently played the game on its merits. There are those who will say that the MFC invited it because its officials mishandled the situation by talking out of school or by being too obvious in the way they conducted their list management. If that is the case it still begs the question why other clubs weren't investigated. In 2007, a Carlton board member boasted to me about Fevola being rested to allow his club to snare pick #1 and a "big fish". They did that after winning losing the Kreuzer Cup. A closer look at some other late 2007 Carlton games really indicates how obvious the Blues were in their attempts. None of this absolves Melbourne if it really "tanked" but the AFL CEO had previously defined tanking and list management and, based on his narrow definition of the act of tanking, I can't see how Melbourne tanked on the basis of what I've read to date*. Moreover, I believe that the rule against tanking is inadequate for what the AFL is apparently trying to achieve. To my mind, the existing rule is bad law and it's lack of execution against a succession of others before Melbourne makes the current investigation a farce. The AFL has to find a way out of this and then make new and better laws for the future. This selective attack on one club alone will leave it open to further claims of incompetence at best and possibly corruption at worst. * I maintain that the issue of defining "tanking" is not the same as whether a club wants to win games or whether a particular club's actions are morally defensible. In Melbourne's case I covered those matters back in 2009. For the record, I supported us not winning more than 5 games but still found the idea repulsive.

Does Brock McLean being tarred and feathered count as "decorated"?

60

Who really cares what others think of us. Judging from what I constantly hear from other supporters, most opposition think we are a joke - but who really cares? Neeldy is doing everything in his power to make sure this club is once again successful and that is all we can ask. Just sit back and enjoy watching a Melbourne Football club that finally develops talent - I hope! As for Essendon, I had to listen to all their one eyed supporters preach last year that now Bomber is back and they are bigger and stronger, that they will make the 4 and be unstoppable, whilst still continuing to blame Matthew Knights for all their failures. The end result was that because Bomber came in and demanded they get bigger - they all broke down!! Essendon is a club that always has excuses as to why they aren't much chop, last year it was injuries, the year before it was Matthew Knights. I wonder what it will be this year? Either way, they are overrated and they won't have the luxury of a quick fire start to the season in 2013.

If it's a Nickelback song, membership renewal will be seriously considered* *not a serious statement, but dear god, anything but that.

I reckon our coaching group is one of the better coaching groups in the league now. Neeld, Craig, Misson, Rawlings, Brown - on any construction, that's a bloody good group. The training sessions seem to run with military precision. They seem to be very well organised - energy levels seem to be high. This is all good. I also can't believe how effectively they've tweaked the list this year. Imagine if we managed to pull off an Oakland Athletics revival circa 2002, and actually make the finals in 2013. I'd give the middle digit to every single person I pass in the street for three months straight after September. Yep - it's not the flag. But it's not that long ago that we got thumped by 186 points in an AFL game - and, at that point, I had pretty much given up hope of ANY light at the end of the tunnel. Thank you Mark Neeld. Good training reports by the way.

Hi everyone, Years ago in my final year of Uni doing Film and TV I did a documentary on football fans as my graduate project. I've been meaning to put it online for ages and finally did it. It features our very own Mohawk (who was a top bloke to meet and have in the film) as well as different types of fans from Carlton, Collingwood, West Coast, and St Kilda. I'm very proud of it, and despite the fact it's a bit out of date with things (as it was filmed in 2008) the crux of the story about footy fans still gets across. Anyway, thought some people on here might be interested to see it. It runs for 12min and in my opinion Angelo (aka Mohawk) has the best line, I'll give you a hint; he talks about our old friend McLaren. Enjoy! https://vimeo.com/57635790

You got your wish

If there is ever a Knickleback song played as our anthem i will forever stay at home. Sorry but they really suck.

I'm often delusional when it comes to this club, but I reckon our list has much greater upside than that of Essendon.

The ironic point has been missed. It's the AFL which tampers with the draft. As it has done with 'the draw'. Which is now a 'fixture', with the emphasis on the first syllable. The 'draft' is something which the AFL has orgainsed to manipulate for the attainment of its own ends. It doesn't like it when other entities try to achieve their own ends.

Should have snotted the little shits

Three seasons ago Richmond were being compared with Fitzroy and there were bets on whether they'd win one game for the season. Now not only does every man and his dog have them playing finals this year, but some are even boldly predicting top 4. Perceptions change when people see hard evidence, everything else is just talk. Win and shut people up, lose and reinforce their already held beliefs. Part of the problem is that Melbourne supporters, including yours truly, predicted how good we'd become with the maturation of Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, Morton, Strauss, Maric, Watts, and Blease. Half of those are no longer at the club and the other half have hardly fired a shot. Is it any wonder that opposition supporters doubt Melbourne ?

Hazy-nearly 40 thousand supporters and the club had a terrible year in 2012 due to circs largely out of our control. Of course you are entitled to your opinion ,no matter how tedious the majority of people find it . A lot of people want CC and CS out of the club-both internally and externally . Why? Is there a reason for it? Or do you think its because we experimented with our list and moved on the elder statesmen? Personally I think we are set for a top year . Anyone with the ambition and the drive to challenge the board should go for it . It's not a closed shop -do it if you have the ticker and the acumen . Otherwise ,don't expect to win friends at a time when we are circling the wagons and you are slagging of those we wish to defend .

Nothing better to do thread. (Speculation about Demonlanders) I’ve just come in from doing “man stuff” in my shed – Jeez floral arrangements involving roses are dangerous. Anyway thinking about the Bombeblitz predictions on another thread caused me to consider what would happen on Demonland if we actually won the first 2 or 3 games of season 2013. Some possibilities. Demonland babies will be conceived. (Old Dee and myself probably won’t feature in that). Sloony – no predictions on above but your comments would be appreciated. Range Rover will be back and initiating a poll about premiership chances. Biffen will become respectable and he and Stuie will share alfresco breakfasts at a fair trade non MSG cafe where all proceeds go to the Midsumma Festival.. Ben-Hur will undo his ignore list and embrace all Demonlanders. (even WYL) Rhino will post only positive comments. WYL will be banned from this site after his 175000 posts cause a meltdown. He will go on to publish his book and start his own Blog. DC will - 1. Stop wearing external underpants. 2. Give up his Monty Python obsession. Jose, Bangkok Demon and WA demon will return to Melbourne. Whispering Jack will allow porn on this site and will, forever more, only bathe in Banana Smoothies. I could continue – eg J viney fan will get a decent haircut. Curry and Beer will change his scary avatar – He looks like a disenfranchised member of the KKK. Titan- Uranus will not change a name that , in itself gives very practical advice. I will stop there. What a wonderful bunch of lunatics this site contains. I just want to see how the bickering and bad mouthing will change when we actually taste success. Please add to the list.

That is why I stopped posting on the other thread, this looks like the next one to avoid.

The views he expressed on what constitutes tanking weren't personal views. They were made in his capacity as chief executive of the AFL. I'm staggered that this isn't obvious to you.

When the CEO of a body indicates their interpretation of their own rule you can bet your house on it that they will be held to that on any prosecution of a breach of the rule. Don't forget that AD said he and he alone would decide if the evidence warranted charges. He doesn't need the Commission involved at that stage. There is no way he will put up a new interpretation and charge retrospectively. He would look a total fool.

No. Let's get things right now shall we. I am so over 5 year plans. Let's make 2013 count.

The Club's record over the past 5 years speaks for itself. There is only one way to change perceptions, and that is (sustained) success.

The Microscope will be on Hird this year & so it should. The way he was appointed along with Thompson was disgraceful in terms of Matthew Knights. But that is Essendon to a tee. The way that team went about putting the MFC into hospital beds on GF day 2000 is the same, but in the same breath WE the MFC should have expected exactly what we got. It is WE who must toughen the f$&@k up. It is not going to get easier.

Just read the link and the Bblitz thread. What a bunch of illiterate morons. If the filth weren't already called the filth then then Essendon would easily take that title.

I presume that is a countdown to the MFC reply to the AFL on the tanking issue. The AFL will need time to consult on our reply so I am not sure of the value of the countdown. If however it brightens your day count away.

You insinuate that we haven't handled our 'tanking' well enough - what about Carlton? They had a former assistant coach and a former full forward come out and admit they were tanking. Richmond's coach said that he did nothing to stop a loss as if that is any different to anything we did or did not do. Yet why are we investigated? Because of a disgruntled former player saying we didn't have winning as the No.1 priority? And why has the investigation lasted so long? Because of a joke at a match committee meeting and Paul Johnson playing at FB? There is no conspiracy, but we are in the cross-hairs of a few journalists for subjective and unfair reasons relating to their issues with a few people working at the club. I am not about to blame the club for the pettiness and vindictiveness of a few journalists who got their way because of the unfortunate instance of Adrian Andersen being in charge when Healy and Sheahan showed their intent. Once again, we are the owners of outrageous misfortune and while that seems to be our 'lot' it certainly is not our fault.

i love how much they hate us on bomberblitz! bunch of c***s

The good part of being the stinky fat kid is nobody expects us to amount to anything this season. Being underestimated can be a massive advantage.

It doesn't matter how others perceive of us and we of them because it's what the team does on the field that matters in the end. However, to those of us (like me) walking around wearing rose coloured glasses after reading those glowing pre season reports, the fact that other supporters think we're a "Crapola club", whilst not particularly traumatic, is a good way of bringing us back down to earth. I remember feeling pretty good about the club's future this time 12 months ago and rather ecstatic when we knocked off Collingwood in the NAB Cup. How did things turn out after that?

Well incase you haven't noticed we've been an absolute pathetic joke on the field for the past five years so I'd say our public perception is about as low as it could get.

For the sake of the club, I hope you are right about the MFC not being charged or being charged and found "not guilty". I do not agree that this means we should ignore the circumstances that led to our being charged (or asked to explain why we should not be charged) and the way the club has managed the tanking and associated fallout from the start. I have noted that there are many fanatical supporters of McLardy, Schwab and Connolly who are keen to do this as they believe that there is a conspiracy involving former club figures and, bizarrely, demonland posters like myself and they are keen to uncover it. Obviously I have a much simpler theory about who is at fault. Regardless of who is responsible for the situation we find ourselves in currently, the club would do well to at least try and learn from this debacle. As supporters, we have a duty to keep informed and to hold the club's leadership to account. Even putting the obvious stuff aside about indiscreet meetings and best corporate practice etc., we would do well to examine the integrity of senior club figures, relationships within the club and between the club and the AFL just as a starting point. After all, we are constantly assured that the club has never been more united and that our relationship with the AFL has never been better. This stands in stark contrast to recent events whereby Connolly has publicly claimed the existence of an internal club conspiracy and we are the only club being investigated for tanking by the AFL. Of course, I do not for one moment think that the Board and Admin will be transparent about these issues but it is clear they can't keep a secret so I am sure that further details will surface in time. You think this makes be a bad supporter, I think this makes me a better supporter. Once again, different camps.

Totally stumped. Waiting for GSmith, to find the answer from his MFC library.

Because Adrian Andersen doesn't know how to handle a job he doesn't have to worry about anymore.

We're in heated agreement on that. I posted an explanation at the end of the AFL Investigation thread as to why it was closed. That thread had degenerated and veered so far off topic that it reached the point where it was almost unreadable. This is an attempt to continue discussion on a rational basis and, to achieve that, the level of moderation will be stricter. Posts involving personal abuse, bullying and flaming will be deleted and repeat offenders will be given holidays and ultimately banned. Hopefully, it won't come to that and people will get the message.

The whole question of whether or not the MFC 'tanked' is almost completely irrelevant to what is happening in the public arena, which is simply a blatant case of victimisation. The AFL is bringing vague 'disrepute' clauses into play, when the present witch-hunt and media coverage is clearly bringing the MFC into disrepute. Some supporters argue that MFC is to blame for its own predicament and seem to infer from the present situation that we would deserve any 'punishment' meted out. They're foolish to think like this, and are doing the club a disservice. The whole issue IS that of singling out one club, after years of numerous clubs inevitably playing out a scenario implied, tacitly approved - even DEMANDED - by the creation of the Priority Pick. The AFL created the moral vacuum, and only they should close it in an honest and confessional fashion. Were this investigation to go to a court, the counsel for the Defence would surely call Mr Demetriou - he who denied, when and if the occasion demanded, that 'tanking' was occurring - as its first witness. There can only be a just end to the era of 'tanking' when the AFL fesses up to its own mistakes and misjudgments. There can be no other satisfactory conclusion to the matter. Further, it should be demanded that the AFL run a football competition that is not deliberately biased by fiddling with the fixture, the draft, the salary cap, kow-towing to TV stations and so on. Individual clubs should do their own soul-searching about ethics - what they are and if they should apply to succeeding in Football; the AFL cannot sit in judgment.

I thought Jim Stynes was the best thing to happen to the Melbourne Footy Club for a long time. I think his legacy will live on long past this ridiculous and petty investigation is consigned to the annals of a long list of stuff ups by the AFL. Jim was good friends and completely trusted Don McLardy. Don in turn promised Jim to do his best to carry through their vision to get the MFC back on track and a viable, vibrant and relevant part of the sporting landscape in Melbourne. Don McLardy and the MFC among many others handled the passing of Jim less than a year ago with dignity and reverance to a great man. I don't know much else about Don McLardy except he has a reluctance to be thrust into the spotlight. But he is carrying out Jim's wishes to the best of his ability, in obviously very tough times. And yet you Hazy while hiding behind a nom de plume and a keyboard keep being disrespectful to Don and others who at least are standing up and fighting for what they believe in, the MFC. I actually think the MFC has handled this witch hunt reasonably well by keeping quiet. I think you would do better Hazy to look at ways you can help out, stand up, be something rather than the pathetic negative figure you represent skulking around these forums.

Hopefully we'll finish too high to consider a top 5 pick. The other reason we might not get a top 5 pick is too terrible to contemplate.

Draft tampering was one of the charges recently brought against Adelaide and Kurt Tippett along with salary cap breaches but that was a case where the Crows admitted to hanky panky over Tippett's contract negotiations. The AFL does issue the odd threat about draft tampering but, a few years ago, it ignored Luke Ball's refusal to talk to clubs other than the one he wanted to go to and even his medical files were not made available for assessment by any other club. They should have thrown the book at him but Collingwood was involved and, these days, you don't want to upset the stronger teams, do you? You do have to go back a long way to find any meaningful action from the AFL on draft tampering. In 1989, Brett Chalmers of Port Adelaide (SANFL) was drafted by Richmond but he remained in SA (MFC draftees from around that time who did the same were Darren Jarman and Paul Rouvray). Three years later, the Tigers tried to trade Chalmers to Collingwood as their hold on him was about to expire. The Pies offered peanuts in return and Chalmers subsequently went into the 1992 draft a hot favourite to be selected in the top three. Collingwood was investigated at Richmond's request but there was no evidence of any breach by the Pies and they were exonerated. On draft day, the clubs were reluctant to select Chalmers who finally went to Collingwood at 10. Melbourne selected Martin Pike at 9 although its recruiters had been keen to select Chalmers. It transpired that, on the night before the draft, Chalmers faxed a letter to the clubs with picks 1 to 9 indicating that he would be staying with Port Adelaide in 1993 and following that wanted to go to his chosen club, the AFL Magpies. In May 1993, Chalmers was one of three Port Adelaide Magpie players brought up on draft tampering charges (Andrew McKay and Robert Pyman were the others). All were adamant they only wanted to play for Collingwood. McKay and Pyman were subsequently fined $10k each for refusing to speak to any other club but Chalmers had gone a step further with his fax saying he wanted only to play for Collingwood. He was fined $30k and banned from playing for the AFL Magpies for 3 years. Later, he had a stint with each of the AFL's SA teams. Of course, the draft tampering in that case was far different to that which has now been apparently raised against Melbourne, but given Dean Bailey's vehement denial of allegations that he instructed his players to lose, one wonders about the validity of such a charge? How could this "tampering" have affected any other club or any players involved in the draft if nothing was actually done on the field to influence any of the results which ultimately determine the team placings upon which the draft is dependent?

IMO tanking is only an issue if it effects the integrity of the game. The AFL version of tanking seems to have been widely accepted in the last month or so as bottoming out. But what people forget is that teams bottom out as a last resort: they arent able to win games playing their best 22, so they play the kids and try out fringe players in different positions to see if they're any good in other roles. Its the last ditch effort to find a silver lining on an otherwise black cloud. This version of Tanking doesnt effect the integrity of the game IMO. Theres no one making big money from the bookies. What Fremantle did do secure a home final by resting players is more of an integrity issue than when the wooden spoon holder puts the que in the rack. If the AFL was dealing with Match fixing then i could understand the recent witch hunt investigation. Just like the umpires can be prone to over umpiring in recent seasons, the AFL has gone overboard with this investigation. I wonder if the ICC will investigate cricket Australia for their rotation policy and experimenting with the one day side with an eye on the 2015 world cup?!

I'm certainly interested in the latter but I don't think the former is of much value. I might change my mind if someone can provide good evidence that the few people from that time who are still around the club, stuffed up in some way that led to us being the target of this witch-hunt. So far I haven't seen that evidence.

Good move WJ, the other thread was stuffed.

It is obscene because he specifically and categorically denied in his book (that was in essence a dying deposition) that the team were never ever asked to not win games. He is dead, and cannot be cross examined. So those who implicate him are basically calling him, unable to defend himself, a liar. That is the obscenity here.

Or a Melbourne 1954. Well, some of us are old enough to have that dream, even if it's in scratchy black and white.

Hazy you strike me as someone who puts his own ego a long way ahead of any self deluded notion of loyalty to club Its sad that you can't see this and continue your crusade of vindictiveness

I doubt they want to tarnish the legacy of Big Jim to satisfy some half arsed tribunal. Some people have whats known as character and loyalty. These concepts may be foreign to you . Google them.

I attended training today and the highlights for me were: I did not realise how quick and athletic Dawes was when the ball hits the ground. Reads the play very well and was the equal and better of oppnents in simulation. Viney stood his ground when triple tackled and still got the handball out. Neil Graig said people will pay their money to see Jack play. Toumpas although in the rehab group looks AFL size as does does Hogan. The team looked very sharp - thanks to the coaching group. They were all involved in teaching and explaining what to do in various situations. Watts seems stronger in the core. Jetta looks stronger. Dunn looks like Tarzan - he has put on heaps of upper body muscle.

My first comments for quite a while, and my first attendance at training this pre-season. Undoubtedly, the most outstanding aspect of this morning's training for me was to see an energetic, involved, and enthusiastic Aaron Davey. He was running, chasing, and tackling as we remember him from 3-4 seasons ago, and he was far and away the most effective ball user on the field, even kicking a wonderful 50m goal on the run from the boundary. Another highlight was Fitzpatrick turning Junior McDonald inside out as he grabbed the ball at centre half forward , then backed his confidence to outsprint his more highly regarded opponent over 30 meters before kicking the goal. I like how Watts has finally broadened his frame to man- size proportions , and thoroughly enjoyed seeing Viney assert himself at every contest. Like others here, I was very disappointed with the kicking skills, though Casey Fields tends to bring the worst out of most players' disposal levels. No complaints about the endeavor of all, though this should go without saying at this time of the year. I'm looking forward to returning with my 3 word player analyses soon.

I went along to training today, again. I have been to 3 sessions over the past week or so, so I think I have gained a fair bit over the sessions. Firstly, the way they are training is very impressive. That is, the structure and style being set out by the coaching group is impressive. I particularly like the way the sessions are completed in 3 main groups. The mids/forwards and defenders basically do all drills and acticities together at all times. it is a great way to get accustomed to each other and form more knowledge on how to work together. Secondly, the effort being put in by all players is super. The drills they are doing require heaps of running while using the balls. It is always moer enjoyable chasing a ball rather than just running. To start with my only real negative, the skills still need work. There are some players with fine skill, however, in general, we still miss targets too often. On the positives, individually: Hogan - A big young man and I look forward to his development at Casey. The work he is putting in this year will be great for the future. Dawes - Moves very well and I am very happy he is with us. He and Clark in tandem will be a tough matchup for oher teams. Davey - He is moving freely, it is the first time in years he is walking without a limp. With his skills I am looking for a big year. Rodan and Byrnes - Both have good voices and instruct people well. I think they have plenty to offer, particularly since they havve good skills and pace. Tynan - Extremely impressed by his size and athleticism. Looking for a big year from him. Viney - In the match simulation drills he is always on the bottom of packs and has great recovery. Gillies- Looks to be a solid defender and moves well. Is being earmarked for a spot in round 1. Watts - His legs look stong and his judgement in the drills is sublime. If he can be the 3rd or 4th tall I think his future is looking very good. His skills are just that good, he needs to run off the back line. Jetta - Really impressed by his effort and he seems to be quicker than I thought. HIs toughness will help the backline out. Spencer - I actually think he will be the number 1 ruckman very soon. He is huge and he has a dip (as does Jamar) but his athleticism is better. His kicking has improved, but he should be a handball first player. Jones/Grimes - both have great voices and they train well every time. Grimes is training with the mids so I would think more time in there for him this year. Blease - as others have said, his speed is the thing. In some of the drills today he ran and carried the ball for 3 or 4 bounces. He is getting better at giving the ball off, but he still needs to be sure he gives off the first option more often. Terlich - I really like the look of him, his skills are pretty good and he is really fast. Have the feeling he may be a regular this year. Kent - As seen in the highlights reel of his, he has a great kick on him. He is also really solid (as are all the players now) Needs to improve his decision making though. Fitzpatrick - Still looks unco, but he is so quick and athletic for his size. I am just not sure what position he would play. There are others to talk about, but if you have any specific questions I can answer them, as I have seen heaps of training so far (the life of a teacher!) Overall though, I am happy with what I have seen so far, the fitness and effort has improved from previous years and as a whole we seem to be able to train at a higher intensity for longer times. I am not expecting miracles this year, but I think a vast improvement is on the cards.

I don't think we recruited Rodan to fulfil the role of a champion. Hopefully our early draft picks of the last few years will come to the fore and provide that. Rodan's there for a purpose however, and I believe that is to add some maturity to a list that is very much lacking in experience and games played. From what I'm told, he's already making a contribution at training and it's the little one per centers that someone like him can add to the group on and off the ground that helps you develop a strong and cohesive group with a decent culture.