Leaderboard

http://www.breakfastwithbails.com/ I haven't read the book but I knew and worked with the man. He was a different cat and one with great insight and an agile mind. Very good for under the Christmas tree and will, I assume, support his family.

Bloke at work who knows Jade Rawlings told me some interesting stuff about Simon Goodwin and the Roosy appointment. Rawlings absolutely rates Goodwin and reckons he is up there with one of the best coaches he's ever worked with, saying he's up there with Pagan, Clarkson and that's not a word of lie. Straight from his mouth my workmate said. I quizzed him on it and said surely not but he said Rawlings absolutely said that and has that high of an opinion of Goodwin and his knowledge of the game and the way he works with players. He also said tactically he is brilliant, felt as though the team could have won more games last year if Goodwin's style of coaching was in practice, players absolutely love him and feed off everything he says. Rawlings also said he applied for the coaching position and was disappointed not to get it and felt as though if someone got it who he thought didn't deserve it he would be annoyed but has seen how good Goodwin is and he is the best man to take over from Roosy. Also said Roosy is a very good delegator and man manager. Culture at the club is the best he's seen it in all his time. Thought i'd just post to all demonlanders a little insight

Daisy!

In my study days we applied 'deductive reasoning' (a legitimate tool of logic when facts are not available) to draw a conclusion. In those days when discussing risk we also talked 'probability'. Therefore my logic on Goodwin's position is: - Bomber (Senior Ass Coach) and Dr Reid did not know of the 'good stuff' and injection regime until long after the program started. Given that Goodwin was junior to them there is a high probability he did not know. - that he took a substance that was legal does not implicate him in any legal or illegal substance regime. - he was interviewed by ASADA and they did not find cause to issue sanction notices (nor did the AFL fine him) - the WADA rules at the time were not broad enough to implicate (some) support staff. Therefore, my reasoned conclusion on risk: As a relative 'junior' at EFC there is a very low probability that Goodwin will receive any suspension. To the MFC decision: To state the obvious: Everything has a risk! But, smart operators make rational decisions. ie 1) identify a risk 2) evaluate whether the risk has a low or high probability of occurrence and 3) take out 'insurance' via contingency plans and/or contract clauses to mitigate the risk. ie exactly what we do in our everyday lives!! MFC is run by smart people. Yes, it is true!! I have absolutely no doubt the club did those 3 things. They made a rational decision in hiring Goodwin. We have smart operators running our club and to pot them is just plain silly...

Shows the split of poster mindsets on this forum. Someone mentioning wada and another comparing the situation to Neeld just because a poster has heard Goodwin is well liked and respected by the other coaches and the playing group. I love hearing this sort of stuff. It's the offseason, what else would you want to hear? You can't win games of footy in December so if you care enough to continue posting on your footy team's forum, surely you'd rather be hearing this than the energywatch saga or someone doing an acl? This sort of story getting spun to the negative says a lot about the posters concerned. Live in the now, man.

My take (ie my opinion, not based on any fact): Goodwin is very unlikely to face any sanction so the risk in appointing him very low. Why? Even if they do go after EFC staff surely it will only be those in an authorizing roles (board, Hird, CEO, FD manager etc) as proving guilt of any one else would be nearly impossible (eg 'i was told this is what we were doing and as an assistant coach i was contractually obliged to do as directed and in any case i was repeatedly assured by my superiors that all was above board' - an argument players can't run but an assistant coach could) Also i reckon that both WADA and ASADA will figure this case has absorbed more than enough time and resources and will happily let it end with the players sanction Taking Melksham was also low risk. Why? Well firstly there is a chance he won't be found guilty. If he is found guilty there is a chance he will miss only a handful of games. If the sanction is longer it is unlikely to be more than 12 months in which case worst case scenario he is right to go XMAS time 2016 and ready to go round 1 2017. Big deal. We have in Michie a player who can come straight of the rookie list into the team and a 24 year old with 100 games under his belt and no major injury problems ready to go the following year Also the AFL might allow us to rookie another player and as someone else said this might result in another rookie gem To say hiring Melksham and Goodwin is a high risk strategy that reflects poor decision making at the top is complete bollocks - in my humble opinion.

It's these kind of sweeping statements that do my head in though. The MFCs interests haven't been affected except in the imaginations of those who believe the future will go south. So I don't see the need for flinging mud at the board or our 'legal hard heads' or anyone else for that matter when nothing has happened yet! The crux of the argument seems to be whether or not we as supporters would worry whether 2 individuals involved in the club at the time are now with us or not. If found guilty of any wrong doing any Melbourne player or staff need to be held accountable. It would be the same if they were found drunk behind the wheel or shallow graves were found in their backyard. Do the crime, do the time. But if the absolute worst happens and both jake and simon are banned for 2 years, I'm not going to be angry at the club! That's life, situations change and not hiring/recruiting who they believe to be the right person purely because speculation says there might be an issue further down the track would leave me far more disillusioned. How many on here bemoaned us missing out on Jack Darling? He was involved in a nightclub fight just before the draft. What if the next year he got into another fight and seriously hurt someone and ended up in jail? Would we all say WC were crazy to take him given his history and the apparent risk? In other words right or wrong, guilty or innocent, banned or cleared I think the Mfc Footy department are smart enough to carry on just fine.

Tell me this Stuie, Did the EFC think there would be an appeal? Did the EFC think WADA would get involved? Did the AFl think there would be an appeal? Did the AFL think WADA would get involved? Did the AFL go against the wishes of ASADA with the interim report thinking they could bully them (very unwise move)? The answers are no, no, no, no, and yes. My answers all along were yes, yes, yes, yes, and surely they wouldn't even try! Seems I am more on the money than the so called professionals in AFL land. For more evidence have look at their laughable illicit drug policy, while not a WADA matter it is ridiculous in the extreme, then have a look at the training they provide players where they are told to trust the club doctor!!!! Stupidity and a complete lack of understanding of the code or what it stands for. The AFL are monkeys when it comes to drugs in sport.

Great picks. This is my first post. I hope it works!

Sometimes. I think you like a lot of posters have a bit of selective memory happening here. In the 2015 season we started to address this problem and when sides came back at us we steadied and then pushed on for the win...sometimes, not always of course and there were some bad results. This is part of a growing team. I'm not as concerned about this now with the turnover of the list, the quality of kids in the team and the maturity of the FD...it sure was a problem though.

To assume that Essendon didn't have contingency plans in regard to a possible WADA appeal beggars belief. The public and private persona of the EFC are two different things. Since early days they have embarked on public relations campaign of epic proportions. The feigned surprise at the WADA appeal was merely another PR posture. Despite what people may think of Paul Little the man is no fool. Essendon's media manipulation throughout this sordid episode has been impressive if not arguably misguided.

i wish there was a dislike button sometimes

As the Fonz might have said ... exacatamoondo. Not only do i rate their opinion (on this topic) more than that of my fellow DL posters (no offence meant) they also are privy to a hel of a lot more info than us (eg contract info, personal relationship, better understanding of impact of drugs scandal, any discussion with AFL about possible compensation in the event of suspensions, MFC contingency palnning etc etc)

Because the salesmen are Goody and the Great McCarthy. Because on the basis of their recommendation, we might all think he's a ute but they think he's a Monaro. Depends on how much you rate the salesmen. I rate them more highly than my opinion or anyone else on here. They both tinkered under the bonnet for a couple of years.

chris, disagree that the consequences if low reduce the risk. they just mean the reward is low, the risk is unchanged so with melksham we have high risk, low reward (imo the risk is 50% or higher) a high risk, low reward is generally something to be avoided. in addition the cost side (mid 20s pick, and 4x$400k)) was imo on the expensive side at the end of the day if we lose him for a year it's not the end of the world, but the issue i have is the decision to trade him in the first place was dubious given our current on-field position. goodwin i agree, seems to be quite low risk

Of course he was drafted post the AFL tribunal decision. That doesn't change my contention one jot. NO precedent for a light smack? Yes the crounlla players pleaded guilty but none the less their light penalty is clearly some sort of precedent Fanboy speak? That's a silly comment. There is no way you can be so definitve that a light sentence is not possible. No way. And as such it remains a possibility (note i never said it was anything but a possibility) and therefore has to be part of the risk analysis equation If Melksham is rubbed out our gain from Melksham is zero? Again that is simply silly. He will remain a MFC player and potentially may go on and have a long and successful career at the dees. He's only 23 for pete's sake. Plenty of players have year long injuries and go on to have successful careers. Lets hope Petracca and Hogan are two such examples

My concern comes from having absolutely no faith in anyone in AFL land having any real knowledge, respect, or appreciation for the WADA code and what they can and will do if they feel it is warranted. This lack of faith extends to every person in every club, they are slowly learning but there is a massive cultural issue within the league around WADA and drugs in sport. That concerns goes all the way to the Goodwin appointment, did this lack of appreciation of the circumstance cloud the judgement of risk, have they even realised it yet. Lets hope it doesn't get to that. On the mentions of Goodwin, he has been mentioned in the past for his dealing with Dank and for taking things that were banned for players but not coaches. WADA will keep everything close to their chest, hence no leaks since the AFL and EFC were removed from the play. There may be nothing in it, there maybe heaps in it, we don't know. I would be surprised if WADA/ASADA didn't go after more than just Dank.

The thing that annoys me with this, whilst I am willing to admit it has happened, is the fact other players have been seen to do the same thing, but it is allowed to slide under the radar. Patrick Cripps, who will be an absolute gun, was a victim of a similar head ducking last year resulting in a turn over and goal, yet did the media make the issue as big as when Watts happened to do it, not at all. Watts is unlucky that both opposition and Melbourne supporters and the media scrutinise him more than any other player in the league. Im most optimistic this season about Jayden Hunt, he provides something that our side lacked last year. Whilst Kent and Frost both add this speed to the side, with a good run with injuries Hunt could show why their is faith in him and why Roos has high faith in him.

You must be putting in heaps of volunteer time Andy. Thanks - it's very much appreciated.

Gees let's give that a rest can we? It's negativity for negativities sake. Great to hear such positive opinions of his coaching ability

I've heard from two separate sources that the players love Goodwin. And I mean love. Posters are right to say that people won't genuinely share bad news, but they don't need to be effusive as they have with their admiration for Goodwin. Needless to say this doesn't mean he'll be a great coach. But it's a great start and I reckon you're halfway there. Naturally, others can please themselves as to how reliable they consider this information.

How dare you question me sir? I'm just itching to try out the ban features of this software.

I'm starting this thread because Andy is too much of a gentleman to ask for some help to run this site. Everyone of us has benefited by the the conversations, banter, humour, despair, joy and excitement of being part of this site. What else would we be doing during the off-season without our daily dose of Demonland? To the point, the site costs money to run. You have all seen the value of the new software that Andy and Nasher have installed. And guess who paid for that? What everyone doesn't see is the extra time and labour and tweaking which then has to be done to make it all work. "Demonland is a Melbourne Football Club fan site powered by fans for the fans. There are many costs associated in bringing you this site. We offer Lifetime and Annual subscriptions so that you can contribute to the running of the site but we are also aware that there are people who want to contribute but can only afford a little bit or have already contributed and want to again. If you would like to make a donation to Demonland it would be greatly appreciated and will go towards running and maintaining this website. " So without Andy having to ask, perhaps we can all show our gratitude and thanks by tipping in a little toward the target of $2,000. EDIT: Changed the target to $2,000 which is what it cost Andy to purchase the new software. Here's starting it off with $100 George

https://six6six.smugmug.com/photos/swfpopup.mg?AlbumKey=WZrdZs Mobile ==> https://six6six.smugmug.com/Training-Photgraphs-Friday/n-3nS3jp

Begone binman, there is no place for logical, well constructed argument on this thread.

technically it was pandora's jar. a far better description that avoids the smutty innuendos

Oh and on Goodwin, any aspiring coach who decided to take a two year apprenticeship under an established successful Coach instead of gambling a clubs future on leaping from assistant to senior coach, has his head on straight, is respectful of the player , the club, the role of senior coach and his own development. These are characteristics which only increase the likelihood of his (and our) success.

I prefer the current banner to an array of heads and avoid the arguments as to who should be on it. The emblem/logo/club colours emphasize the club/the team over the individual. Keep it simple.

don't try and understand, chris in stuieland the officials at afl, mfc and efc are all full time professionals and therefore are more knowledgeable than us they never make mistakes and never try to hide the truth from us they are above questioning and may never be challenged qed

Surely you jest! I am yet to see one person in AFL land have any really appreciation of the impact the drug scandal may have.

Too right. Its the same negative people who continue to moan and groan about any sample of positivity.. probably the same ones who are Emailing Roosy non stop telling him how to do his job.

I like the idea of Big Max being on the extreme right hand side of the banner and you can use his beard as the scroll bar.

By all accounts, a very well respected and inspirational human being. We could do a lot worse when thinking of Christmas presents that will make a difference. One of too many ex Demons whose life was cut unfairly short.

The proof of the pudding is in Pandora's box.

So repetitive posts of the opposing stance to mine are totally fine, but you want to have a crack at me for asking for facts a few times? The theoretical posts are fine, but the posts slagging the club and saying we're dumb for hiring Goodwin and trading for Melksham are ridiculous given nothing has actually happened, and Goodwin has not even been mentioned.

shucks..................ok,...... if you insist......

The crux of the Goodwin problem is this. Assuming CAS wipe out the EFC players ... we have heard that WADA will then go after the "ringleaders", comprising Hird and who else? We don't know. It could be fitness staff like Dean Robinson. Or the good Doc. It could be desk jockeys like Paul Hamilton. It could be administrators like Robson. (Who do WADA want to make an example of, to give pause to other sporting clubs who figure they'll try the Essendon blueprint?) We don't know how much part Goodwin played in it, if he was a "ringleader", or if he was out the back cleaning the tent poles. He may fly under WADA's radar. But here is the big but: the casualness with which banned drugs were accepted on the premises. A squeaky clean organisation would have had no part in any banned substances. Would have ordered them out of the joint in case The Man came knocking. But here was Essendon with Hird, Goodwin, and others, not only not doing that, but using them themselves, no probs mate! That has to reflect poorly on anyone involved in that. Regardless of WADA, ASADA, ACC, ALP, MPLA, UDA, IRA or UK. With 2/3rds of F.A. to work with, posters here are extrapolating scenarios proving each way that Goodwin is safe/gone for all money, and bickering about whose made-up scenario is wrong, and how Superman Jackson will proactively save us from any fallout. Until show cause notices are issued, we have no way of knowing what will occur. But we can work out this much: EFC coaching staff will not be receiving pats on the head from WADA. It is not reasonable to say that any of them are "safe". Don't freak out yet, it may never happen. (Save your rage and panic for the right moment!) But don't be surprised if Goodwin is amongst those pursued by WADA in "the next wave". He is not safe.

Let's not forget that he's part of the current coaching group that has been unable to stop our roll over merchants from throwing in the towel every time an opponent physically challenges them. What's going to change when he becomes head coach? If the players love him so much then why are they still prepared to put so much embarrassment on the club, coaches and supporters by being the softest group in the comp?

Stuie, most of us realise these are opinions on here and not statements of facts. once you figure that out you might understand and stop boring us with the same posts, we get your stance, we got it 80 posts ago. We all want facts, some try and theorise possible outcomes. its what most of use use forums for.

Sorry but ya just have to throw Big Max in the mix....

As difficult as it is, i try and view the rebuild as only really starting under Roos, in his 2 years so far we have gone from 2 wins 58% to 7 wins, which should have been more like 10 a really strong core of talent that looks like taking us forward, slowly winning back respect and i think we can play finals next year if everything plays out perfectly injury wise.

Talk about a lame post. I recall exactly the same stuff being written when they appointed Dean Bailey & Mark Neeld. Only one way to measure Goodwin & that is on field results. Anything else is B/S.

I am going for 10 to 12 in 2016 but look out other teams in 2017!

We need to WIN AT LEAST 7 before the bye. If we can win consecutive and even get on a roll early on... the confidence will build quick in a young team. First nine games should hold few fears with GWS GIANTS (11th) Essendon (15th) North Melbourne (8th) Collingwood (12th) Richmond (5th) St Kilda (14th) Gold Coast (16th) Western Bulldogs (6th) Brisbane Lions (17th) All winnable.

Isn't the situation with Goodwin is that he used some of the treatements? Like Hexalerin (or whatever)...and if so I can't imagine any penalties that would be significant (and whether they have any evidence).... It would be stretching it to say he was an integral part of the doping programme..

Can any of the hystericals out there explain to me why the Mfcs reputation will be tarnished in any way if Jake or Simon end up facing repercussions?

Hopefully Colonwood fall. Sharply.

You seem to forget that one of the main objections some had about her at the time was not so much for her reporting of fact but for the way in which she blurred the line between fact and opinion so that her journalism on the so-called "tanking saga" became editorial dressed up as reporting of fact. Hence, for example, an anonymous person's observation that Cameron Schwab appeared "ashen faced" when Melbourne won its second game of the season was somehow conclusive proof of "tanking" or when Chris Connolly stuck his head into a meeting for 30 seconds in the "vault" and joked about it, she dramatised the meeting into something it was not. We now know of course, that her source for the latter was a disgruntled former employee with an axe to grind against her club. Nevertheless, we're still free to draw our own conclusions. In her latest report on the Essendon saga, she's telling a narrative about evidence given by players at the CAS hearing. Whilst I agree there isn't enough context given about the evidence and how it was introduced, it hasn't been contested anywhere that the players gave evidence on the question of their knowledge, that the judges were "troubled" by what they heard or that separate tests on two Bomber players found heightened levels of TB4 (which is in fact old news). Whether that's enough to create comfortable satisfaction as to the player's guilt remains to be seen but it doesn't mean by accepting Wilson's reporting of what she was told about some aspects of the CAS hearing, that people necessarily should accept her methods and the way she conducted her inquisition into what happened at Melbourne.

After reading todays reports and the players completely neglecting to mention to drug testers about some of the injections, I withdrawal any and all defence I have made recently of them and have no sympathy at all towards them

Too bad for us. We can't let our own vested interest affect our desire for a just outcome. If the players did wrong, they deserve to go. If the support staff did wrong, they deserve to go. The fact that we will suffer should not alter our steadfastness. Otherwise we're on the road to corruption too.