Rhino Richards

Who is Brad Miller holding back at Richmond?

I will use BBTA but I cant control the other uncouth elements on this site.

I think the Travis Johnston and Brock McLean deals were the last time when it happened. Would you prefer BBTA - "blessed by the almighty"? I would have thought the activity is more obnoxioous than the term and represent a far bigger cop out.

BC pulls up sore from Saturday's race and is scratched from Perth. Wont be back untii next Autumn http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horseracing/black-caviar-to-miss-perth-race-20111107-1n2mo.html I hope good sense frrom those who know temper the rush to risk the horse overseas prematurely.

I have already explained what Schwabs disposition was. The Board had other alternatives to use than a graceless phone call. I have no issue telling anyone to their faces that the sacking of an employee by phoned is not appropriate. Period. Its funny how you demand me to go "Face to face. Eyeball to Eyeball" with a group of people that run crucial positions by phone. Could I text them instead? As for tough guy antics, how have you gone getting Denham's address so you could give your 8 cylinders? I would like a well performing CEO to be at the club. If thats Schwab that fine. The Board seemed to have trouble working that out. As I said he made a bad judgment. Stynes is human and he erred on this occassion. Try and move past the fawning sycophancy. I cant think of any industry in Australia where it is the accepted norm to sack workers, be they card carrying unionist to senior executives by phone. Bailey showed himself above the antics of the Board. FWIW, I thought the whole media conference circus held that day was one of the most cringeworthy cynical and underwhelming presentations. I have witness from an AFL club. The way Bailey was ostracised in a seperate meeting you would have he had an incurable disease. From Jimmy's frail demeanour to the circus parade performed in front of the media, it was embarrassing to say the least. Settle rpfc. Its a minor detail resigning versus being sacked. Its a quick 1 minute question at a face to face meeting prior to advising the Board's final decision. The issue is the Boards mode of communication.

You just proved my point on following discussions..Brilliant.

If you did follow the discussion you would not have asked the silly question about have Jimmy get out of his bed to meet with Bailey. In posts #34, 50 and 52, I repeatedly stated that the VP or Board member deputise for Stynes. There was no ambiguity and you asked the silly question in post #62. DUH.. Go back and re read. I am glad you refer to " honourable journey to Dean's abode".No one from the MFC Board did the honourable thing. It would seem that there was little honour in using the phone. I am quite prepared to debate any issue WYL but as others have noted you struggle to maintain it particularly when you arguments are put up to the light. I will put employee relations in the same basket as debt.... another black hole. Well done Robbie, the Board met and decided that Bailey had to be sacked. If the Board had deemed it appropriate they could have indeed got Schwab to do it. They had decided to retain him as CEO, so why could not they use him? And thanks for misrepresenting my views on McLardy. Well done again. There was nothing to stop McLardy and/or a delegation of directors making the visit to Bailey's place to pass the news. There were clearly better and more appropriate options.

Clearly you dont follow discussions. If you did you wouldnt ask ridiculous question when I have made my position clear. I dont find the ill health of a President as an appropriate reason to not to do the right thing and have either the VP or senior Board representative see Bailey personally to do the sacking. As you have deemed him a "good bloke", at the very least for what you have credited him with doing at the Club, he deserved it and was owed it. The phone call was expedient to the disposition of others with little honour attached. You know 2 nutshell comments and the value of them will be missed here by those that dearly need it most.

I have already stated what I thought should have been done. Why do you ask facetious questions? Which parts of the discussion dont you follow? If we go by your take on the issue, Bailey should have been duly humbled and honoured to have received an after hours call. The circumstances seemed to suit persons other than Bailey who was not given due consideration. You are kidding 3165. It was you that raised workers in post #55."Rhino do jump up and down and take the moral high road when someone gets the sack from your work," Firstly Bailey is not an AFL player. He was a coach of MFC. And neither any of my colleagues nor an AFL coach can get drafted. Secondly, Bailey was an employee of the MFC (employer). I am an employee of an unnamed company (employee). The comparison and analogy is completely valid. Your right! B)

Why does Dean have to bleat to the press about it to make it inappropriate? Its not a matter whether the victim accepts it or not. The facts leading up to the decision are irrelevant. Sorry the Club has indeed spoken about why it was done and how it was done. Choko,it was just a poor judgement call. I dont accept that an individual's health should necessary dictate not doing the appropriate steps in regard to a serious matter. I think it was well within the remit of the VP to do the job. I dont believe keeping Bailey on until the end of the season would have been the right thing to do.

Well done on missing the point. I have no issue with the decision of the sacking just the manner of execution. And to use your analogy, if one of my colleagues was sacked at work by means of a phone call, I doubt any of other workers would deem that an appropriate method of termination.

I agree with you on process and that impacted the manner of communication to Bailey. You raise some interesting comments about Stynes's actions and motives. I cant speak for that. But it would appear that his way in this matter may not have been the right way. As I said I hope MFC learn from these events.

I can see Bailey being really appreciative about getting an unexpected call from Jimma and saying "Your sacked". I wonder if he kept a copy of the call so he can cherish it in the future. And in regard to Bailey's position, I had understood it was a Board decision but as you say he casts all the votes.

If anyone does not get it... Bailey has shown himself to be far more professional than to go public on this issue. It does not need a LCD media circus to assess whether a phone call is the appropriate way of sacking someone. It is really simple... A VP or board delegate show the basic respect for someone who has worked hard for the Club and tell them to their face that they are being sacked.

Lucky Bailey is a good bloke otherwise heavens knows what would have done to him. Given Stynes's fragile health and the fact that McLardy had been front and centre around the football club, it would have been reasonable for the VP or a delegated member of the Board to have the decency to have met with Bailey "face to face" to tell him. He had to go. There was no reason why the VP or delegated group could not have done that. Bailey was owed more than a 22 cent call. Its was a poor execution of process. From my understanding Stynes did not necessarily hold Bailey in high regard so I am not sure how it could "mean more" to Bailey. A sacking of a senior role should never be done via a phone call. Its that simple. Its actually "right" not "rite". I just thought they could have done things better on this occassion. It not like you to miss the point or take things out of context. Agree and hopefully those involved learn from it.

If that is the case then its poor judgement by Jim and the Board. Once again if Jim;s health is the issue then McLardy should have deputise. Its a cop out to think otherwise. I think you are guessing. The decision to sack Bailey was a Board. Clearly Stynes is unable to fully fulfil his role then his VP should have done it. Its ironic that the VP and some Board members can meet face to face with the players behind the CEO's back only days before but cannot find the good grace to tell the coach to his face that his sacked. And the Board did work hard. WIthin a few short days they went from wanting to lynch the CEO to lynching the Coach. Poor boys they must have been too tired to do the right thing.

Indeed Good summary. Your regard for him as a Coach does mitigate the need to do things properly especially when the behaviour of Board members in the lead up to the game help disstabilise the side. Bailey had to go either post 186 or at season's end. He deserved better than a phone call.

Notwithstanding that Bailey would not have been coaching us in 2012, the Club handled his sacking very poorly. Particularly when he sacrificed his record for draft picks and blooding youngster. He deserved better treatment. I am glad he has obtained another role. Good on him.

Well said Clint. Too much hand wringing. He is gone. Move on.

I think you are longing for the past..... He may well play til he is well past 35yo but it wont be in the AFL. If he cant handle heavy tags, (lets face it he cant handle any tags period) then he cannot afford to lose one iota of pace. He is at the crossroads at the moment and needs to redeem himself. At the moment he struggles win his own ball, cannot stand physical pressure and displays inexplicable immaturity on the ground....and he is a team leader. If Neeld seriously walks the talk then Davey would not want to display the 2011 vintage stuff at all.

I am glad the FD would think otherwise. Joelmac may well be an honest if fringe stop gap. But he certainly isnt an option to cover a Bartram type role. Completely different types of players.

Its coincidence. The IR is an end of season jolly. Nothing on leadership there.

I am not sure what role Dunn fills in effectively on a temporary basis. Another year like this year and he is a definite delist if we cant score a low level trade.

The fact is that MFC lost a No 1 pick does not look good period...It would not look good for any club. That's the point. Confirmed wrong. The tanking issue does not stop with the Coach. And its naive to think another coach would not have been part of it. It made perfect sense to maximise draft opportuinities. If we had Neeld in the same situation i would be ropable if we ended with 5 wins and not less than 5 wins.

The word is "argument". No its just a discussion WYL. When you get found it or someone puts an alternative view that challenges your view of the world you get all snooty and claim its an argument. Poor form. Edit: I note you refer to HT as it being a debate and yes WYL that is what it is.