Rhino Richards

Agree. Lots of character. Speculation thats idle at best. DB was right not make a statement whether Garry Lyon should be coach of MFC. Its not his domain and was not going to be part of the media circus circling.

Like Paul McNamee....

No you are struggling. Bailey will go if the Board determines him to go. Period. Like I said Bailey will not be only scapegoat. You picked a 31 goal flooging from the body language. Bravo. You were jumping at shadows at OTC. If you really want to be clever you need to back play when Stynes took "control" of the football dept eight weeks and who was going to be impacted by this. It stems beyond the big loss.

It goes deeper than the coach......

The changes being considered are not just based on yesterday. The debacle is the lightening rod for action on issues that have been simmering for some months since Stynes announced that he was taken over the FD. They would have happened by year end but events have brought them to fore. The media has reported Schwab, Connolly and Bailey are in jeopardy. Time will bring things out.

Dont start changing you tack. You didn't ask about the Captain having one disposal. You asked this "Why does Bailey not have the players, when they all back him when asked?" The coach should go. The captain and the leadership group should all go. Why do you struggle with that? If it goes deeper than the coach why is the coach let off?

B-e-c-a-u-s-e t-h-e-y l-o-s-t b-y 31 g-o-a-l-s. You are classic WYL. What would you expect players to say to the media when asked. Duh. If we left it to you to find out Bailey would break Sheedy's coaching record. If MM is coach, DB will be sacked as coach. If DB floats around the FD who loses their job?? Its so easy to sack and start again isnt it. B)

It certainly does not fix it keeping DB. Bailey knows he is accountable and it should be the new coach that determines key football dept appointments. Its clear Bailey does not have the players behind him after that soft effort. There should be coaching, FD and player departures over the coming 8 weeks as a consequence of yesterday and the year in general.

I would have thought it best that the players were not seen in the media for the rest of the season. I just cringed reading River's tripe.

Joeboy, I have changed the title of your thread from "Inbreds" to "Cats". Not only is the reference witless and in poor taste. They were beaten by 31 goals by them. A little judgement thanks.

And I totally share your despair.

Agree TimD. Well Said. Bailey's days were numbered when Stynes took over the football department. It should be a matter of when he resigns or is pushed in the next 48-72 hours. However it does not stop there. Accountabilities should also extend through the football department and the playing group. If the leadership group is not cleaned out at year end and we persist and support the younger leaders then this Club is kidding itself. I dont want to hear or see an interview with an MFC player for the rest of this year. I would like to say they can play there brand of bruise free football in shame and in silence. This is a real test of the Board.

Agree TimD. Well Said. Bailey's days were numbered when Stynes took over the football department. Its a matter of when he resigns or is pushed in the next 48-72 hours. However it does not stop there. Accountabilities should also extend through the football department and the playing group. If the leadership group is not cleaned out at year end and we persist and support the younger leaders then this Club is kidding itself. I dont want to hear or see an interview with an MFC player for the rest of this year. I would like to say they can play there brand of bruise free football in shame and in silence. This is a real test of the Board.

Who's head of the MFC Football Department? I would not stop at the Coach. Performances like this should be accountable from the top down to every player.

How could it be a breach of team rules when long term a player want to play a different rule. Bailey was not trying to expand his options at all. Bailey realised McLeans limitations and wanted to play other options in the midfield. Its theatrics to claim he sulked. He sought out other options and wanted to go elsewhere. MFC obliged. Its a two way street.

That's not selfishness at all. Its reasonable for McLean to want to achieve his outcomes. MFC was also closing his doors and sned him elsewhere with the low ball contract renewal. There is no irony at all about this. McLean's body has been shown to be questionable for AFL and his form suggests what MFC had already worked out. He was struggling with the tempo of the modern game and was not key player in MFC's plans at the end of 2009 that he appeared to be in 2006. He hardly left MFC in the lurch in tought times.

So is the truth.McLean selfish in seeking other opportunities after kicking in out of his own pocket into the debt demolition?? FMD. McLean's days were number under Bailey. He was struggling for fitness and form at MFC in his last 2 years. In his final year he was given tagging roles. With the onset of Scully, Trengove and the likelihood of other young mids, his window was narrowing. He was also coming out of an expensive contract which the Club re offered with a substnatial haircut in salary to reflect his fall in stature. He rightly sought his opportunities elsewhere and Club obliged. And you have now added to them. In his final 2 years, McLean was no where near the captaincy. And as time went on he was drifting further way with every mediocre performance provided. Surely the answers you provided to your own question would show you Carlton are far from mad. McLean's spot has been taken by a raised rookie Curnow. Slow players need to strong in other areas of their game to compensate. McLean is not strong by hand or foot. The players you mention have compensating strengths. McLean does not show that and has not for 5 years. And his form 2 years ago was mediocre and he needs to lift about that. And he wont be getting Blues game time without injuries and if he continue to give off limp tackles like he did last night on Cunnington. And MFC is not a charity and there is no sensible reason to draft him. And its self serving to think McLean just walked out. The parting was clearly mutual.

Both Dawes and Reid will tied up financially well by both their Clubs. Reid is going to be very good in future years. Only his 2nd year and he looks exciting. Reid at the Swans is making Jesse White a redundant. But I am not a fan of White.

You should know there are no certainties in football. To win a flag you need everything to go right. And you can lose by the slimmest margin and the dream is lost. Just ask St K, WCE and Swans. In MFC's case given its financial and other dispositions it needs more to go right than some other Clubs to get there. MFC's blue print gives us the best chance of success. But no certainty of it. Which hard fights are you talking about. Are you old to remember why the situation in football is much more different or have you been too distracted by the Bard? Its not the talent thats debatable it the development and the production of the performances that reflect that talent. As I have said ad nauseam, the talent is potential and our future success depends on a number of factors giong right...some we can control, others that we cant. But the players I mention are unlikely to end up a Dunn or Newton. I think some of them will be stars or at the very least 200game players (hopefully with MFC) with great careers. As I stated before your first statement is wrong but it might just be poor choice of words. Of the players I picked, most have not played 50 games, are under 21 and are playing in side where the lack of leadership and support by senior players is farcical. I think under the circumstances there are been some very promising performances and we are heading in the right direction. And I have said ad nauseam, success is...... Well done on missing the point on each occassion. Quite an achievement.

No its just stating the bleedin obvious in managing the salary cap.

Wow. That will fix the Club. Woohoo that's showing them. One poor decision does not balance out another poor decision. You just have two poor decisions.

Wrong. The simple fact is that we have one good senior player... Jamar Frawley promised alot??? He was AA last year at the age of 21! He is also playing very good football now. You have a dim view of the future. The Club has said repeatedly we need to get at least 50 games in each of these players before they have the experience and know. Many of the players I mentioned have 10,20,30 games and are showing they will be very good footballers. They are not plug in and play toys.

North won two premierships (1996 and 1999) on the back of two of the greatest players to have ever pulled on the North jumper....Carey and Archer. They were well supported by a plethora of B graders. But that was 12 to 15 years, the whole financial dynamic of football has changed. The financial difference between the haves and the have nots continues to widen. All the football costs outside the salary cap are uncontrolled by the AFL and the richer clubs are able to buy, retain and develop the best. The poor live hand to mouth and play catch up where they fall further behind. Maybe you should support North. They are crock as a Club. They wont make the finals, there best players are ageing and they will never seriously challenge in the foreseeable future. They are financial destitute with a crumbling supporter base and questions over there long term future. They only exist to provide air time for the TV rights. Not much to be impressed about. Does it ever bother you that "our draw is the best that we could hope for" and its looks terrible against the gilded draw of CCollingwood. Darwin indeed does count. MFC need money to stay afloat and have to sell games to Darwin to do this. Yes it is our choice but do you think we should reduce our coaching staff by 2 people to cover the loss of revenue? We would have even fewer coaches and football staff than the Pies, Essendon and Eagles. Its not a matter of the AFL deliberately boning us but the AFL draw unevenly favours some clubs over others. So this is just one example where sides dont have an equal opportunity that you claim. People who say they are sick of excuses are generally those that dont understand the reasons why the outcomes are as they are. I love the cliche of "accepting second best/mediocrity". Can you names of MFC personnel who have stated that they have done that. For most of the past 46 years MFC have not been good enough to challenge the best. The clean out of list over the ppast four years and the recruitment of young talent is our best chance to build to make a challenge in future years. But it is difficult because of the financial and other obstacles MFC have to overcome which are not as difficult for some other clubs. Hope you get better.

Can you explain why we mysteriously have 3-4 senior A graders and the rest B grade but you cant see we have a talented list? For mine we have Jamar who is A grade when fit. The rest Green, Davey, Rivers and Moloney are C graders against class opposition and flat trackers against the weak sides. And for me our talent and hopes of moving forward are not there with them.

The fact is they dont. Have you ever taken the time to compare the turn over of clubs like Collingwood, WCE with paupers like North and MFC? Do you understand that they have allfunding to spend in areas where there is not salary caps etc?? Hmm You must be in a dream if you think we are able to scoff at other Clubs who you believe are broke. Incredible. Just because we paid off the debt does not suddely mean voila we all of sudden profitable. MFC have yet to develop and foster a profitable and sustainable business model.Why do you think we sell games in the sapping conditions in Darwin? But you are right MFC should have just as many opportunities as anyone else to be successful. The bald fact is it doesn't. Some of this is MFC's own legacy. Some of it is the AFL's meddling and patronising imposing of rules. Can you explain to me how the AFL draw each year provides equal opportunity to each side to be successful?? And why clubs like Collingwood enjoy a largesse of MCG games with little interstate travel (eg Darwin, Cairns etc)??