Rhino Richards

How do you measure the backward kicks? Got a reliable source? Was he actually playing on Harvey, Ellard and Milne for the whole game?? Or are you matching off Bartram with small to mid size forwards for the opposition?

He has played 61of the past 66 games. Consistency of selection and fitness is not the issue. Consistency of performance is.

Definitely. I reckon Neeld could just look at the Club year book for 5 mins and be better informed than some of the supporters on MFC.

1. The aspect of tanking or bottoming out has a timeline of success greater than 5 years. And in MFC the problems with our list and given what has transpired with Scully we could still be out of the 8 in 2012. (depends on your definition of struggling). 2. Hawthorn, Collingwood and Carlton have attempted to bottom out to varying degrees and 2 of those have won flags so its not doom and gloom. 3. A well picked recruitment team will only get you so far if they dont have the draft picks. In addition, you wont get the well drilled footy department if there is not the underlying talent in the players to extract. For all that happened in 2011 at MFC, Neeld has inherited the opportunity to mould a talented list that is now up to 4 to 5 years of maturity. I am not sure we are paying for tanking now. I am not sure if there was a better option for MFC in 2008 that would not mean we are paying more harshly.

OD, I think Sylvia is what he is. i hope we get more from him but I am not sure. Expectations have always been high on Sylvia when we took him pick 3 in the dismal 2003 draft. It was a poor vintage year and aside from Cooney I have seen little that elite from that year. I think Sylvia is more your typical pick 13 to 19. And FWIW its worth we took Bate and Dunn round there too in 2004. Trapper always had the magic about him until about 2006 but he never delivered on it consistently.

Trapper was a No 1 draft pick, broadly assessed as the best talent in his year. And I can understand why. His good points at his peak were intoxicating. However Trapper never worked out what was required to be truly succcessful be as good as he could have been. He was a wasted talent. We did get good years in 2002 and 2005. But it was a poor return in over 10 years at the Club. Sylvia has talents but not to match winning capability of TJ. He was OPed early in his career that held him back. I have no doubt Col puts in the effort. I dont think at times he has the smarts under pressure. But I think with Col its WYSIWYG. I hope he is the sort of player that does get better as the team does. I think Ben H made a good observation about Sylvia being a finisher and predator..If we could get a productive side going with a multi pronged forward line then Sylvia would be a hard player to cover. Great overhead for his size, strong and can kick 50+m goals. While I dont see him in the midfield I can see him there in short bursts. Agree I have never viewed B'low votes as a reliable metric of performance in a side.

Under the circumstances you are right. But the original comment was that WCE were equitably compensated for Judd. I think you would agree they werent. WCE were held over a barrel with Judd leaving as a star and out of contract. Carlton could have offered more but didn't want to. I cant blame them they had WCE on toast. Did you like any of the other draftees better?

Yes you can. All they got were picks 3, 20 and Kennedy. They got uncertainty for a player that was proven at the time and has gone onto proven that he is on track to be one of the greats. The only way could deal with the uncertainty was to find two stars with those picks. They havent got them. If you are saying that fairly compensated after what they could have got in the negotiations then thats fair. However pick 3,20 and Josh is far far < Judd. WCE did the best of terrible situation (which was there own doing). If the negotiations were even and arms length i would have expected that Judd would have been worth 3 top 10 picks (say 1,3 and 9/10) in a proven strong draft list. But even then you have to good talent in that draft year and you have to draft well.

The "ridiculous" is in reference to not being picked. You could also include in that saying that we should have taken Martin instead.

Exactly DC. Claims on here that people had concerns with Scully back then and that it was obvious (only in hindsight) they we should not have picked him at #1 are ridiculous.

The jury is still out on how much they lost. With pick 3, they took Chris Masten who has played only 54 games in four seasons and has off field issues. He may well mature now and play decent football fro the rest of his career. But he has hardly been a gem to date remembering both Rioli and Dangerfield were in that draft. They got Josh Kennedy who has settled down to be a capable 50 70 goal forward. He will be be good for WCE. For pick 20 they took Tony Notte who has done zilch and i think is gone now. For mine WCE did not get anywhere near equal compensation and the risks of the compensation they did get is making sure you pick we.. And given Kennedy is good they needed to uncover two gems with picks 3 and 20. This was always an uphill battel and IMO they have blown the picks.

They didn't at all. The Eagles lost a one in a generation ( no mark that two) match winning midfielder and premiership captain. He will go on to finish his career as one of the all time greats. The Eagles will never cover losing Judd with what they received.

India tie the ODI with Sri Lanka but it appears that the 30th over of India's batting only had 5 balls in it. Oops. An error by both umpires and the 3rd umpire/ Match Referee. Dhoni says he isnt going make a big stink about it... Quite right. It happened, action should be taken to ensure it does not happen again and the result of a draw cannot be feasibly undone. All fine. Then Dhoni links the error to the DRS system to establish why the DRS is not a good thing. Huh! The ball count error is a human error which cannot be addressed by the DRS system. The DRS system was introduced to address human error in dismissal decisions. Dhoni and his Indian cohorts have performed in public far worse than there 4-0 result. And the tie from an umpire error could not have happened to more deserving bunch of prima donnas. I used to really like India as a cricket team even when they were seen as boring in the 80s and 90s. Cant stand them now and it started with monkeygate in 2008 and its continued. Their domination of cricket at all international levels is proving to be a disaster for the good of the game.

Mark Neeld's comment: "The other really big eye-opener for me was, unless you are working within the inner sanctum of a football club, it is impossible to understand how the club operates - from an on-field perspective right through to the boardroom." This could very well be applied to some of the slap downs on the concept of leadership in this thread. Bing's comment "the problem hasn't been the leadership group, it's been the lack of leaders to put into it." is closest to the pin.

I reckon Colin Sylvia will be the sort of player who will retire in years to come with soooo much potential. Now in his 9th year of AFL footy, its about time we stop the potential tag on Sylvia. How about he just delivers consistently for one year if not more?

What did the brother think when Davey gave away 50 in an important game? What did they think when he went the gutless cheap snipe with his elbow? he is not a leaders bootlace. The brothers can either play for true leader or join brother leader at Casey? Since when was Beamer favourite for any Captaincy. At best it was an open race with no obvious favourite. Given Green was leader in absentia and Beamer hit the fizz last year.....its not a big call at all. Neeld has sent a message about the future and the future is starting now. Its up to Green, Davey, Beamer and Rivers to be a part of it. Green's making the right noises atm. I guess we could always play safe and just stick with the inept leadership we had last year. No risk there.

I understand the need for pace in the midfield over 20metres. Moloney does not have it and you cant buy it. And its cruels him defensively. I understand the Jamar comment. But Beamer requires a perfect tap to his advantage to bust a tackle. If he starting to run at speed and strength against a stationery player then he should be breaking at least some tackles. His accountability is a mindset issue and if the dropping of kgs is an issue then it might indicate his lack of fitness in recent years. His awareness is a personal issue not based on the number of players around the ball. He cant be the clearance king if he is so dependent upon Jamar being there to give him an easy ride. If he needs too much structure one wonders about his abiility to think under pressure particularly against good opposition. When he goes long he should be putting to the top of the square so if the ball is not marked it can be brought to ground. I would have thought at the very least the presence of Green and Jurrah should have made you assessment invalid. Too often he overcooks the ball and we lose possession and advantage. Another issue about thinking. And you check out prove your claim on the goal kicking. You're the one making it. The leadership issue is irrelevant because Neeld has decided it and Beamer is not it. His "onfield leadership" is winning the possession of the ball, using it effectively and nullify his opposite number in the midfield whether it be a good team or bad team. He needs to follow and execute constructively his role in Neeld's plan. Nothing more. I agree he is no star. But i expect him to do his part and perform better against good sides. Brock McLean??? - I dont think so. MFC did not have a good midfield in his last year. But he was not good enough to get in it. Could not get a gig in the main centre make up in his final years. Spent many of the games tagging players because he could not hurt sides offensively.

There is a yawning gap of difference of discussing the strengths and weakness of a player and personal abuse (walk down the street advise people as they pass that they are fat, ugly, smell...etc because they are such upfront straight shooters). Re read, re think and try again. And "bleeding" for a club has to be most hollow accolade placed on a player on this site. Its means nothing. And its begs the logical question "Which players dont bleed"?

Over the past 4 years Brad has kicked the following: 2008: 20.13 (60% accuracy) 2009: 12.3 (80% accuracy) 2010: 55.27 (67%) 2011: 37.25 (60%). Its not bad conversion but I seem to recall he has missed alot of gettable set shots from 40 metres. Last year he seemed to do that at critical times, which added IMO to his leadership woes. Might help not quoting another posters post when you are not intending to respond directly to what you quoted.

Thank god we have isolated the reason for the lack success down to Brad Green. We should have delisted him. He is clearly a jinx.

Not at all. Neeld has behind him, Neil Craig, a high priced recruit in Clark, an expanded fitness department, (hopefully) settled and supportive Board with a talented playing list that is up 1 year older and at least 20 games. The wind should be in Neeld's sail. I hope Neeld succeeds with it . However if Neeld's first year produces an outcome and standard of play that is no better and if possible worse (does not necessarily need a 186+ display) than 2011 then he will surely know what it is like to be an AFL coach. And questions will be rightly be asked. People like you have been patient (well most of the time) for a number of years. If they are not seeing that improvement then MFC will not be a happy place. People will have their expectations up over what has happened in the past six months. I think 2011 will give Neeld less room to hide. Perhaps unreasonably in his first year.

But Dunstall was out injured for the PF. Interesting at Western Oval that day. Full of memories. If I remember correctly the KP game finished before the Foots vs Mel game. I seem to recall when the news broke out over transistors all over WO that the KP siren had gone there was a huge shout and jumping for joy of MFC supporters. It seemed so loud when amongst the crowd. It does not seem so loud on replay but clearing the players were halted momentarily wondering what was going on because the WO siren had not gone. Great day of football I have been too and at an absolute s&!(heap of a ground. The next 2 weeks at the MCG against North and Swans was also unforgettable. The MCG was like a cauldron. The PF at Waverley was like a match at a concrete outer suburban ground with carp access. No atmosphere at that ground (too open).

No problem. What I believe objectively on how we will go is different to what I hope. The same applies every season. Here is to Sept football for MFC!

And more often there isn't. Since the 8 was introduced in 1994, there have been 12 years where the difference between 8 and 10 on the ladder has been two games or more. I can often recall that the when the 8 had been settled at R22 or earlier for a season, there was a gulf between the top 8 and the bottom 8. 2011 being a good example. There have clearly been outcomes over the past 50 years where a kick has decided a finals berth but it is illusory to use the odd example to justify the difference between 8 and 10 may not be much. Especially when history suggests otherwise. Hence my comment up to 3 goals. Cheers!

He's been told like all players where the future is as Neeld sees it. He has two choices in regard that. He has accepted that he wants to be part of the future. Smart choice.