Rhino Richards

Great then you will know we still have the same constraints on us relative to the competition and we are still constrained. Oh and thanks for restating the points you quoted from me. Good work And give away the CAPS writing. Its does not do anyone favours on the forum. And back on Jack Watts I hope he really starts showing the goods with Clark up forward to take some heat. He has got the goods

The paying off the debt was important step for MFC but it did not usher rivers of additional money, As previously advised the paying off of the debt cleared approx. $600k of the bottom line. As a % of the total revenue of the Club its not big. Its welcome extra money but it is a small help in the overall battle to run an AFL Club as the costs of competing rise each year. We are still just barely breaking even and battling to generate any saved capital from our normal operations. Its great to have a "one off" like Bentleigh but that was a one off. The extra revenue from the MCC and any from the AFL is great. However these initiatives only allow us to fund operations to just keep up And if we have to spend money to make money what are our money spinning ventures atm??? We are sinking much of the extra cashflow into the FD and I have no problem with that but the payback is still some years off in a flag, sponsorship and memberships income streams. And there is only so much money you can spend before you have to .....um....go into debt. MFC are battling hard and honestly against the ever more costly bar of competition. We still live hand to mouth. Nothing has changed in the past few years that suggests we dont.

Agree. Any chance that an 18yo in front of the media might have been deflecting some of the fallout of some bad losses at the time?Hmmmm. Nothing has changed WYL. We still have to live hand to mouth on the money we raise. Do we need another discussion about the debt?

Whatever happened the following season has no weight as to what happened within 8 days of late September 1987. The Prelim final was an exhausting,draining slugfest where two sides put their all on the table on that day. Neither side could give me. I knew a couple of the Hawks players that day who said that they played their GF at the PF at Waverley. They said they were emotionally and physically drained in the lead up to GF. Its like a boxer having a 15 rounder one Saturday and lining up against a fresh capable opponent the following Saturday and expected to perform. And both Hawks and MFC were different sides after the PF. Soon comes the day. Its alright JJC. Its plain common sense. You dont play unfit players in a GF. And given Flowers injury was a shoulder injury, painkillers would not have stopped the consistent opposition probing of that injury. But if you have got the doctor's report JJC I would be more than welcome to receive it.

MFC was run by the MCC back then...not very well at all. Agree. It was Bourke

What makes you [-----] Biff?

.....or make such a callous public comments about one of the players under their direction.....I know footballers arent a bright lot but that tale stretches the imagination.

Frankly i prefer actions. Statements are just words. And I dont think anyone is trying to "forget" 186. The astute people at MFC would be placing it in its proper context and situation, identifying the issues and dealing with them...rather than drowning in melodramatic ultimatums.

Sounds like a perfect match.

I would have been concerned if Neeld was appointed and finished his obligations at Collingwood. Once he accepted the job, it would have been a conflct to have continued at the Pies and to focus on MFC.

Its a relative embarrassment of riches when almost 6-7 years ago Nathan Carroll was a valuable player because he was one of two backman we had. The other was Rivers and he had chronic OP!! At the moment, we have Chippa, Rivers and Garland in the 22 and we have the potential of Davis, McDonald and Sellars. And FWIW, Davis and McDonald are talented and MacDonald have shown good signs in his early

Agree on the MM-Bucks baton change. Its never easy to lose an assistant. And I cant see how you can keep someone on when they are joining the opposition. Neeld's position was untenable but not an easy decision for the Club. Correct Fan

THanks Old Dee. Thread locked.

Sorry JJC, i should have said 7 out of 8 H&A games. And we won 2 finals and blew the last one. As the Preliminary final, you seemed to have overlooked in your revisionism that the preliminary final was a tough slug fest against an extremely strong opponent. Both sides spent there ammunition at the prelim final. The wave that MFC swept to the prelim final petered out after half time as MFC sought to hang on after it began to tire. if you watch the replay of Simon Eishold when he took the mark he made no effort despite Flowers urgings to improve his angle when he got up off the ground. Psychologically he was shot and was never going to make that kick. And we lost the prelim final because MFC stopped doing what it had been doing in the lead up to the prelim final. We went into our shells in the 2nd half. In the last 15 minutes, MFC were terrible defensively. There was one passage of play where Langford (?) kicked out striaght up the guts and we had no one at the fall of the ball behind the pack and the Hawks raised it down for a goal. Simple stuff. And i dont see the form relevance of what happened in 1988 having any bearing on the outcome of the GF. The Hawks went into the GF bruised and battered and played a rested Carlton in 27C temperature, melted and were easily flogged. MFC were as battered as the Hawks and would not have done any better. As for Flower, the shoulder injury finished him regardless of the result. He was already having pain killing injections in the shoulder to come back on at the end. The injured arm was limp and inactive by Flower's side. He could not have played and had he done would have been given numerous hip and shoulders before the start of the game to soften the injury. Lets not forget he was already having pain killing injections for a broken finger. The shoulder injury was a serious blow that he would not have overcome.

And under instruction of Stynes, McLardy and the Board. Like the PP, there is an incentive if they do. And that is wrong If you had a chance of limping into 8th position with an injury riddled team or got pick 9 in an uber draft what would you do? If you did not tank you might be tempted. And if you were honestly flogged in R22 and fell out of the 8, would there be a smear on you? The AFL should announce the scrapping of the PP before a ball is bounced. The PP allowed Carlton to get Judd and take Kruezer. Why else would have Bailey tanked?? And getting the PP is one thing. Using it effectively is another. I share your hope.

Speculation with a heavy dollop of misused hindsight. Labelling anyone a player basher has all the intellectual rigour of branding them racist. Give it up. Can you also advise which players are not red and blue through and through? I understand some of the players dont bleed red and blue either. Shocking

You are speaking from personal experience only.....with hindsight.

The call on whether a player plays is the role of the club doctor and not the coach. The coach does not overrule the doctors. You need to understand how the medical staff actually operate in an AFL club before making half cocked assessments on nothing more than uninformed hindsight.

And of course you are a doctor at the scene and you were able to diagnose....Oh wait you didn't. I would also be careful sporting statements making uninformed allegations about the actions or competency of medical staff. Not wise.

I thought the issue of our midfield being poor was not an excuse to play Morton. It was more an assessment of how Morton performed creditably within a bog awful midfield. I dont think as a "skinny kid" Morton was flogged. The argument can be put that Morton could have coasted more in the lower pressure of the VFL. And I dont think playing him in the AFL denied him from getting stronger. Both could be achieved. Watts progress in his early years was slow. Firstly, Watts did VCE in his first year and had no pre season and limited training regime. Aside from the Collingwood error, he was given a very gradual monitored development path. And I dont think there is a proper way to "ease" into AFL football. The reality is there is nothing easy about. And as for the current regime, all we know is they have picked a 20 yo and 22yo co captains (with less than 40 games of AFL) with a young leadership. You are not going to try and tell me they are being eased into their positions at all.

It was misjudgement from a player who tried to push himself and failed. Clap him in irons I say.

Right and he still has the opportunity to do so this year. Unless you have another substance in mind And from all reports you have no basis to determine whether he will or not. And I am glad you are waiting....season has not started yet. Quite. He did not play the day at Skilled Stadium but make no mistake he was the catalyst for 186.

I dont see a problem if the issue of up staging is not present. Moloney is clearly more extroverted than others. Players address pre and during game pressure differently. So long as each players preferences/antics are assessed as being to the betterment of the team then it should be OK. Its something for the FD to monitor. The FD has made a big call on the leadership group. The FD need to ensure that they back them to the hilt.

Wow. Thats the first time I have seen Davey's 50 metre penalty in another game be the catalyst for 186. Brilliant. Or even worse agendas that deem to write off an MFC player without a scintilla of substance.

I thought in a very poor midfield, Morton was very capable in his first year or two. Aside from the Collingwood debut game, i think the club have been very careful with Watts in their use of him. He was always going to take time. And I dont think he has been incapable but has warmed to the role being expected of him. I think his development is as expected.