Rhino Richards

Not much common sense either.

Its not on The Age website and its not on the MFC website..Caveat Emptor.

My understanding was that there were a couple of training issues and a couple of after hours misdemeanors. And I dont read Big Footy.

In the scheme of things his "mistakes" were trivial and he has learnt from those. He leads out on the ground by the way he plays. And his contribution to the Debt Demolition was a generous act and full of real character. He was not expected to do that and did not have to do that. MFC are looking forward to the future and he is an integral part of that. I cant see why we would not make the Badger Captain in 2009. Leadership starts with the game in the middle and I think Brock would be apt to lead the charge.

There are varying degrees of risk. Hislop has fundamental character and attitude issues at the bottom end of AFL population. And if we worked hard to get rid of Carroll, then I am not sure we would take on another culture problem. In addition, he has a number of fitness/injury concerns I am sure the Club will do the sums on Hislop but I dont see a lot of other Clubs vying for him. Chris Johnson seems to be drawing more interest. And there is no surety that Hislop has the strength of character and mind to focus on AFL after a series of really immature and stupid behaviours.

Given how poor the PSD is this year, why wouldn't they use pick 67 on a Stefan Martin unknown type and pass on the PSD where at best you are getting NQR damaged goods with no real upside? At this point the PSD#1 is as valuable as ABC Learning shares.

And he had to work with no support in the midfield to the most lack lustre ruck combination around, its no wonder Jones was at times overwhelmed and it was not due to lack of effort or desperation. At any other competitive club Jones would have been 4th or 5th up in the midfield. At MFC he is the No 1 midfielder. Go figure. You're missing where the real problems are and were. Enjoy your witch hunt though.

Thought the same thing, India out by lunch or under 400. I am not sure from what I have seen that Australian bowlers have it in them. The only bright spark is the Indians seemed to lack proper concentration to the task. Aside from Dravid who IMO is finished at Test level. The retirement of Ganguly, Kumble and the historonics over Gambhir may be taking their toll. FWIW, I did not think Sharma and Zaheer bowled well in the last test and this pitch aint for them. Sharma should be remembering to that he "lost" the last test with that dropped catches. Is Harbijan fit? Brett Lee has never risen to level many Australians had hoped for. Has his moments but he has relied on blast them out tactics for too long, is not the smartest quick bowler and lacks the ability to consistently swing the ball. Where is he at now?

And he wont enjoy the drive to Cranbourne either. Good analogy. He is about as ordinary and overrated on this site as Phil Read was.

From a football promotion perspective, Cousins is damaged goods. A bloke that had it all and blew it the most public and ridiculous manner. Cousins humiliated himself and all involved with him. I think the AFL will just want Cousins to return for one or two years then disappear. The last thing it wants is to have Cousins exposed on drugs again. If there was an issue in the future with Cousins, the AFL will stage manage and suppress it like they are allegedly doing at the moment. Not that Eagles would agree with that. The tenfold media increase could be for all the reasons you dont want.

The difference between a PP at No 1 and a draft pick at 17 is considerable. The PP this year is he best talent of his kind in the country. Think a Kruezer, Murphy, Gibbs and Cooney. They might start at the same spot as a lesser draft but there class sets them apart. If you cant realise the difference in quality that your talking about them enjoy your bliss.

Read post #8 and I know nothing can be done. But to say its not an issue and that a 1st round PP because they werent good last time is naive. The handling of the post ND time in 2007 was a disaster for the Club. And it will haunt us in 10 years time for what we could have had. MFC needs to get alot smarter that it has demonstrated at times over recent years. Lets move on, realise the mistake and ensure it is never done again.

But it was not the priority pick that was the issue? And if we are worried about contingent events lets not get Jack Watts with our first pick! He might do a knee. The B'low medallist, the Norm Smith Medallist and the Coleman medal winner were Top 4 picks in their respective years. If you want talent you need to have the best draft picks possible. How is it that 16 AFL Clubs know and treasure that (ie they wont trade them) and you work it out??? We all knew where MFC stood in 2007 when ND was sacked in Round 12/13. It was a train wreck and we were going nowhere. What message was given to Mark Riley that we won meaningless games against Carlton (x2) and the Bulldogs. We curse Carlton for tanking when MF were not smart enough to read the tea leaves and ensure it had won no more 4 game record for the year. The Bulldogs game was the game that crucified us. Just for the record had we won only 4 games in 2007 we would have access to a talent in the range of Grimes and Maric. This year we would have access to Daniel Rich. And if you still cant work it. Do the analysis and work out what the lack of access to potential quality footballers did to us in 1999 and 2000 with the salary cap penalties. Together with poor recruiting in 2001, there is currently a yawning gap on our list for quality footballers aged between 26 and 29. Go figure.

Amazing! You would not want to have access to the 2nd best youngster in the country! The reason the PP was of limited value last time was the quality of the 2003 draft pool. Aside from Cooney and possibly McLean its been a disaster. And that was not the fault of the PP! This year has been rated as a cracker with the top 3 being very highly rated. The absence of talent in the trade or PSD draws makes draft picks particularly Top 5 picks absolutely vital to your Club future. You should be able to judge now not in 10 years. Agree.

I think you are wrong but there is nothing we can do about it now. Its right to think positively about the future. But still I would have liked Picks 1 and 2 this year.

The last round in 2007 has been done to death and I agree with your frustration. However how are we bending over to Carlton? The issue of the retiring greats had nothing to do with the fact that Carlton had destined to itself to lose the games amongst other by not tagging TJ who got 41 possessions. Isaac Weetra was more of MFC great than that the cheat Pickett. For a poster who is making criticism at the Coach your post is absurdly negative. What do we do if we were say 4 wins after 6 games? Tank it or go for it. If the players can improve and get those results should we pull them back? If were 4 wins after round 16/17 then I agree that we should ensure our PP. The major issue is the extent of the improvement in our existing group of players.

India's stance is both provocative and disturbing similar to their audacious and unsportsmanlike support for the rogue Harbijan. This does not shy away from the debacle the Australians have made in selecting the Indian tour party and the Test teams chosen. Why they selected Krejza to tour when they weren't going to select him is puzzling? Also the Test selection of Cameron White as a no 8 batsman and a part time spinner is baffling? Where is Beau Casson? Why did they "force" Brad Hogg to retire last season? Its unbelievable that we could have been undertaking a tour of India without a recognised spinner. If we are to have any hope in this Test then we need to win the toss, bat and hit 550+ then two or more of the bowlers needs to have a day out. Here's hoping!

Fair points H and a balanced assessment. No one is doubting the difficulties he has been through. But you are right there must be improvement in 2009 from the team and a number of players. Given the financial position of the Club, I think the Board will struggle to find the bucks to pay him out if it did indeed decide to do it. Amazing.

Jones is nothing like Cupido. Its a strange analogy.

The guy was our No 1 midfielder at the age of 20. I dont think desperation to cement a spot is an issue. There are other players in the gun before him.

Yes. Neitz, Holland, Yze, White and Junior are all testimony to that. In fact all footballers are testimony to the fact. Bailey was not lying he was handling the matter with a diplomatic palm off in an interview. What did you honestly expect him to say? A list of shortcomings of players in public? That would endear him to the new playing group wouldn't it. Its takes the pits of naivety to think after a team has been comprehensively beaten in 2007 that you could misuse a such comments in an interview to formulate such silly conclusions.

Dont bother. I said it was in the mix for greater success IF AND ONLY IF 4 key and critical ingredients occurred. They didn't and none of those ingredients were achjieved. In fact in each case it went the opposite direction. At least I can identify those events unlike some who are caught in a time warp. Does not 2007 and 2006 show how things can quickly change Mo? MFC in 2007, Freo and WCE in 2008. And is that why you cant give a Coach 3 years to rebuild a list? Because things change quickly?

Sadly it is the same game plan structure.It has been in your own words refined not changed...refined. It only looks better with the players together to play it. MFC is going about getting the best possible talent it can. Mind you the quality of the MFC list left nothing to reasonable trade unlike Clarkson's good fortune.

*Cough* We first played like that against Adelaide in late 2006 as Daniher finally admitted his game plan would not get him past the middle rungs of the ladder. He then realised that how outdated the game plan was you believe he modelled around his list and thus not good enough. What then does it say about the list ND had created for his last roll of the dice? Ill equipped at best. Its ironic you pulling up people for not explaining when you have ducked, weaved and disappeared when required to put up. Nice try.

Brilliant Mo. So if your list is crud made up of leaderless lazy senior players who have passed their use by date and is dominated by younger player what do you? What game plan would have suited MFC with the chronic lack of skill, talent and experience? You adopt a game style that you believe will bring you ultimately a premiership. If the players cannot compete with that style you go out and find players that can. The lack of guarantee of getting the players you want should not deter you from trying to improve the list. The issues that bugged Nathan Jones under Bailey also bugged him under ND. His disposal and thinking under pressure is flawed. Its the modern game of football. I'll cut Jones some slack. In McLean's absence Jones had to be No 1 centreman. A ridiculous ask at any other Club for a 20 yo. But it might have something to do with the list. Hmmmm. Careful Mo, your giving a very good summation as to why the Daniher years post 2000 were flawed. And its because of those decisions we have a surplus of one paced footballers with limited skills of hand and foot that could barely break a clothes line. Coupled with a number of senior players who were selfish, lazy and unaccountable its no wonder we treaded water then we went nowhere after that. So the Hawks should never have appointed Clarkson? Or the Blues ...Ratten? Wrong. A coach's job is to win a premiership by building the best possible team from within and from outside by playing a style and brand of football that he believes will bring you success. If your list is poor then you need to supplement substantially and this takes time. In the case of Bailey what were MFC's strengths that you could build a list around? What was this magical game plan that we should we have adopted that would have brought success with the 2008 list?