Rhino Richards

The need for point 2 cancels out the risk somewhat of point 1. Robbo has to play smarter to survive in AFL. Lack of team orientation and absence of 2nd efforts will cruel any other benefits he brings to the side. Hopefully his time on the sidelines will knock some sense into him. I had understood that given his injury that he may not be ready for AFL until sometime towards the mid 2009. Any updates?

Absolutely agree on the tough guy stuff. As a player, Carroll left very little on the ground at the end of the game. He just did not bring much to the table to work with. Despite the tough guy bravado Carroll struggled physically one on one with many of the top forwards. Poor decision making particularly under pressure where the ball represented a hot potato in his hands. He look better than he was when MFC had few other options done back. Times have changed. Every player is in contention for AA. Its the hyperbole on this site that talked him up as AA FB. He is a limited footballer that is talked up by posters that seem to value attributes that are small currency when it counts. The tough guy stuff was too often embarrassing and detrimental to the side despite exciting those posters with suburban football instincts. Your comments abourt Bailey's youth policy is revisionist rubbish. Given our defensive stocks he is about our sixth choice up back. He leaked like a sieve this year and its no wonder in a such an underperfoming side that Carroll could not hold his spot. The fact is that he is a fringe footballer who is a culture sore with some long running social problems. The Dolphins match only shows that he can cut it at VFL level...sometimes. His game against Frankston should also be compared to some of his lamentable VFL efforts for example against the Scorpions. Brainless and reckless. This has to be the overrated piece of football action around. Carroll tackled Gehrig and Gehrig was put off balance and went awkwardly on his ankle. It was a contingent contact injury not a direct consequence of the tackle. Making it to be more than it was is dishonest. No the Saints may be getting a cheap ratbag. More fool them.

Some years ago when Bangladesh won the honours in a one day game against Australia, I said that regardless of this, its a travesty to Test cricket that Bangladesh and Zimbabwe were given and retained Test cricket status. There were howls of protest from posters about my comments. Then a couple of weeks later Jason Gillespie hits an unbeaten double century in a Test against B'desh. All the howling posters went very quiet. Since then nothing has changed and ICC has another embarrassment it does not address, particularly Zimbabwe. Is there a global sporting body around who has had the game its supposedly regulating pass it by as much as cricket? As for NZ, I dont think I have seen a greener, more inexperienced NZ line up that Vettori has to lead. He has done very well with such a side. NZ are on the rebuild. However, I have read an article saying that the Australians have just figured that the Indians are reverse swinging after 10 overs. Australia is doing after 70 overs. What the FFS is Troy Cooley doing? IMO that a massive oversight by a side supposed to be world champions (ATM).

Phil Pinnell Michael Young Paul Hurst Brent Heaver Peter Rohde Ronald Barassi????

Is there a Premier league club called London? The AFL might need the name but may not need the baggage that goes with it. They will have enough marquee clubs to choose from ..... Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon,.......

A fine summation of the state of play.

What it proves is that at best with a good draw and being near the top of the table we draw average crowds where some of the impetus is provided by larger drawing clubs. Nice :D ....sort of like moving deckchairs on the Titanic We are financially poor, asset poor, low membership, no facilities, no regional reference. The AFL have asked what we stand for. There is little evidence to suggest that MFC would quickly reinvigorate. The AFL will not arrange a merger between one or more existing AFL clubs unless it is clear that is what the members want. 1996 was an embarrassment for the AFL and they will either relocate or pull the licence. But you are right in our current position, we could easily become expendable unless there is massive change in the structure and fortune of the Club.

Correct. And one year of average crowds does not facilitate a basis to get a better cut of the draw. To gain a better draw you are going to need to show a sustainable and reliable increase in crowd numbers that can verifiably tied to MFC's influence over a number of years. Unfortunately the last 10 years of MFC home crowds reflects a sorry tale and in some cases the complete opposite to what Nugget is suggesting.

Firstly, the Troy Broadbridge issue is a one off matter and not sustainable. Richmond gets 30,000 members rain or shine. Its a sustainable number. We just get to 29,000 after seasons in the mid to low 20,000s. Get the point. Hawthorn and Carlton finished 14th and 16th respectively in 2005 after consecutive prior poor seasons. They still outdraw us for a match even in the dumps and we were riding high... Go figure... So much for MFC being a crowd pulling club. Secondly, Melb vs Geelong was at the MCG unlike most of the other games and where MFC has a traditional rivalry with Geelong that does not exist with Richmond and Geelong. And Richmond vs Geelong was a Sunday game as opposed to a Friday night for MFC vs Geelong. I note you did not address my point about the paltry size of the MFC vs WB game given the status and importance of the match for both clubs. Its a disgrace. My 20k number was in reference to the crowds in 2007 and 2008. Now where were all the MFC supporters? For all the complaining you make about the Hawks and Carlton when they had there lean years, they have the capacity to deliver very strong and above crowd numbers. When MFC goes badly the crowd numbers crater. When MFC goes well, the numbers barely break the league average and there is some distortion from the proportion of non MFC supporters. I think your point is flawed because of non sustainable and one off issues. There is more to attendances than just crowd numbers on their own. Furthermore as a dedicated MFC supporter and match attendee for 40 years, I know when MFC supporters turn up and dont. When they turn up its in average numbers, when the slightest downer is there they disappear in droves. At the least the Club recognises the scale and complexity of the problem even if some supporters dont.

I wish Lyon felt that like Brayshaw does.

You need to look behind the numbers not just average them. Firstly, Geelong and Adelaide were Friday night games with Geelong a high volume supporting Club. Friday night games do get stronger support. Adelaide fans travel. Sydney (the old South Melbourne) still have a strong base of supporters in Melbourne. 4th(Swans) vs 8th (MFC) should have pulled more supporters. Only fair Melbourne Essendon was a Friday night first round where you always get a peak of crowds. Also it was the Troy Broadridge match so numbers would be skewed. Melbourne vs Richmond (3rd vs 4th) -Friday night. Richmond can pull 30000 members in seasons when they are playing crap football. How many of those supporters were Tigers? When the Tigers are performing their crowds do turn up. Melb vs Bulldogs - For two clubs fighting it out for finals at the business end of season at the MCG, the crowd was ordinary. Its a slur on both Clubs. Melb vs Collingwood - 70% of the crowd would be Collingwood. You just cant average the figures and go there's the answer.

No sympathy for her here. Is she from the same faction as that Federal Labor MP than was in the NSW scandal?

Maybe, MFC are not a fair cause Using an interstate game is flawed as only one group of supporters travels across the Nullabor to attend either game. But compare that when MFC plays NM or WB and its not a first round. Lucky to get 20,000. Its a terrible indictment on the support of those three clubs. And before people go rattling about NM's financial recovery, here is a team that has had legitimate claims to a top 4 spot in the past two years and they still struggle to get a crowd. Nugget you need to be careful with your use of stats as its causing you to miss the wood for the trees. No I am not having a go at your sight. Its another axiom!

Like who? Big Eddie????

Nugget you have just proved that there are lies lies and damn statistics. Unfortunately, your argument is fatally flawed and your recall of history likewise. Be careful when quoting spectator numbers as it does depend on who where playing. By playing the big supported Clubs like Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton as home games our numbers look good when in truth the great majority are not MFC supporters. BTW, I dont care to be noticed by the AFL general public. But it is clear if you want that if you want the better times and venues etc for your games, you need supporters to turn up. And yes the 2009 draw is a chicken and egg. However MFC needs to evolve to become a relevant well supported AFL Club. And turning up to games would be a start.

Brayshaw made comments as the President of NM. Ox and Lyon are presently employees of commercial TV stations that are keen to get or keep football rights. They wont be mouthpieces for too long, particularly Ox.

Agree. Critics would say we dont turn up to matches and we dont turn up to protest!

Nothing like a rumour. However it is a valid concern when you go and pay top market value for a young player you set a benchmark by which every other player manager will be pitching in for. The Blues will have to manage this carefully. Or is that Visy? Did it actually do that? Do you know that for a fact? His existing contract would 2 to 3 years old and his salary would be below where his market value is. Murphy would be one of the marquee players in the Blues line up. I doubt whether they would financially squeeze him. They will squeezes others though.

I am sure DB has his eyes set on an appropriate candidate for midfield coach. Woey would not be on my list for the role. I am not sure why there is this compulsion to appoint ex MFC people to coaching/ leadership positions. I want the best person for a job no matter their past club allegiance. I certaintly dont want to entrench a culture that has sunk us for 40+ years.

I think the poster has been supportive of Caro Wilson for some time. No need for the unnnecessary feckless comments on chauvinism.

I am not an optimist for players when they have had OP for 12 months or more. I agree if fit Rivers is in the side......if fit. Make that fully fit. Its disturbing how much footy he has missed. I have not seen a public or reliable statement on where his fitness is at and when he will be back. At this point, I think any announcement of just when he will be back is going to be subject to...... It will be interesting just where he plays when he does come back given what has evolved up back.

Looks like you are singing from the same sheet I was.

I am not sure why so many posters are categorically claim breach of contract when none have actually seen the contract. In particular your second sentence makes no sense. Your saying its not matter of breach of contract but whether the breaches (of what? ) are enough to allow the MFC to terminate the contract. What for?..... Breach of Contract. Gotcha. I dont know how you can come up with an arguable case for breach of contract when you have not seen the contract. And by the way have an "arguable case" is akin to opening the floodgates for expensive lawyers and more bad publicity. Wouldn't you also think Carroll has an "arguable case"? Ping......penny drops. Brilliant If there was open and shut case for terminating this contract seamlessly then dont you think the Club would have done it by now? This issue needs to be treated carefully and managed sensitively to avoid unncessary fall out on the Club. Some of the egotistical slash and burn resolution are beyond belief.

St Kilda need to cash in while the Riewoldt generation are at or near their peak and not past it. They are back filling to try and crack a flag. Their recruitment over the past few years good and bad highlights this. Makes sense. Agree. Carroll is in the box seat. MFC still have to pay him his 2009 salary unless there is breach of contract. Its not clear whether Carroll not training with MFC is MFC's or Carroll's. In reality its probably both. Its in MFC interest for him to find a home elsewhere. Carroll still wants to play AFL football. Fine. St Kilda are looking at a potential back up for Hughdon. Fine. They will likely get him for low low dollars assuming MFC has a residual liability on the 2009 year. Carroll's problems are now Carroll's problems not the Clubs. For all intensive purposes he is effectively off the list at MFC. As far as the playing group is concerned Carroll is a bad example and his exclusion would be a positive. And Carroll wont be back at MFC.

Talent is a major but not sole criteria. More emphasis is being out on character. Its not a matter of choosing talent vs character. And whether a player is an introvert or extrovert is not one of the criteria. Introversion/ Extroversion is not a basis to assess and grade character. Its a matter of picking the best talented individual that you believe has all the tools to succeed as an AFL footballer. I guess the test is if you had two players of similar talent, one demonstrated the maturity and endeavour that you believe is required, the other one having a record of poor discipline, little focus and an immature attitude, which one would you take? Its a no brainer. For someone who boasts such hiring experience and knowledge then you should realise what goes into recruiting top talent but dont demonstrate it. Its more than round pegs in square holes. And I would not call a face to face meetings with a number of people involved in a player's development reference checks. Its a silly reference. The level of research that goes into recruting league footballers is far in excess what is done in many forms of business.