Rhino Richards

Season over for Beamer. The leadership team will be overhauled for 2009. He can be considered then. But I dont think he will make it. Beamer really needs to show that he can comply with the game plan requirements. His enthusiasm is great but he needs to constantly think about what he is doing. His default mechanism to bang it long clearly is indiscriminate does not impress Bailey and he needs to sharpen that. At least another season away from consideration if at all

With at least 4 of Neitz, Yze, White, Whelan and Junior to retire this year and the likes of Bode, Weetra, Carroll and CJ in the gun, is Moloney really blocking a spot. As has been said his OP is now controllable such that he is running out games and is selected in the best 22 atm, I would have thought he is worth at least another contract at the right price. A player who is 25 or over must still be best 22 or at least challenging for that role to look at an extension. Look at the past premiership teams and they include player 25+ who are not best 10 but have a role to play in the side.

Neitz was out injured in 2004 and the wheels had well and truly fallen off by the end of August that year. We lost the EF with barely a whimper In 2002, Neitz kicked a great goal in the last (?) qtr against Adelaide but it was not enough to stem the tide that day.

If St Kilda would only go for Bruce if they were close to challenging a flag and need a player like Bruce. They arent in the picture for a flag and I dont think they would go for Bruce. I am not sure with Gehrig gone that they have a need for Kosi at FF.

They have 2 relic big men. I dont see White going on beyond this year. St K will want at least a first round. They look at Kosi as flawed but talented. Id say at least 16 (= TJ) I am not sure I want Kosi at that price.

Good question. You could say its 18,000 x $?? per head but it does not work like that simply. It is going to depend on the mix of MCC and AFL members that make up the pot. I know we get something per head off the MCC for each MCC member that turns up for to a MFC home game. Too many variables,too few equations to work them! I think AFL will extend a limited and finite funding supply to the end of the next TV contract if our attendances are low. If QBW attendances are around 50k, we are in trouble and the Club is in trouble. Our on field performance in 2007 and 2008 has dictated low attendances levels that are approx. 20% below where they should be at a mid point. We need to build on that mid point. I hope Stynes with new Board, new CEO, nearly new Coach with a talented young team supplemented with draft picks can move forward.

So how do we replace the income lost? Its already a marque game on the AFL calendar and is already a spectacle with big coverage. Its a block buster if both teams are competitive on the ladder. They are not at the moment and that affects the interest. Its disappointing you so readily willing to easily to give up something without a tangible alternative to fall back on. It may happen but it will hit us financially and hard.

Melbourne vs Carlton this year or any future year that Carlton are competitive. Essendon is another Club that would fit the bill. Why is it that everything Melbourne gets is "charity"? We play the QBW round as a home game as the only marque game we get in fixture that is otherwise deliberately slated against us in favour of other Clubs --- That's charity. We get CBF Fund from the AFL like some other Clubs do yet we actually receive less in payments from the AFL than other Clubs - Oh MFC is receiving charity! Lets get over the guilts of whatever we get from the AFL or whatever and start realising that MFC deserves its right to existence is entitled to receive whatever compensation it receives if the AFL wants a "competitive" competition ( ). Furthermore we need to also recognise that the threat or removal of just one of those sources of income will threaten our continued existence given our difficult and protracted financial malaise. The loss of any income source is not easily or simply replaced in the short term and possibly in the longer term. Its not about creative negotiation its about fighting tooth and nail. We dont have a financially viable fall back position to negotiate from.

it depends on the plan that put forward and how they carry it out. I am concerned who the 8th member is unsure or reluctant to commit to the cause. A "name" will get you so far. Its what they can commit to the Board.

I thought it was obvious the AFL was interested in crowd attendances. Vlad's reaction was predictable and consistent.

Sorry S T. I am more than happy if the creative negotiating leads to a win win situation. The examples shown clearly dont. However lets remember where we currently are (financial stricken but with the QBW as a home game) and that the game is not a charity game but also a consequence of the lopsided draw the AFL has delivered us. FWIW, in your estimation any home game we have against an opposition with bigger membership numbers in Victoria is a charity game. And when you negotiate you do so on what you can offer to give back to ensure you get what you want. We dont bring alot to the table based on the AFL criteria. We need to fight hard for what we get and fight to retain what we have. When it comes to fixturing unless we have fought hard like the current Board has for fixtures rights we would just have to take what we are given. From an AFL perspective MFC does not bring many value elements to the table for fixturing and their attitude toward MFC with regard fixturing will determine not only the QBW but potentially the future of the MFC.

Lets all buy them a Collingwood flag and a badge. Give them a cushion as well. You cant be serious. I think the AFL will laugh in our face on this one. We cant get many members, we get poor supporter turnout to our games and you want to let opposition club members in free and the AFL to fund it???? And you expect the AFL to fund. Bugger that. Lets give Collingwood the QBW as home game ....period. Not only do you p1$$ off your once a year supporters who you are trying to track down and to sign up as members but you also stick it up the MFC paying members who pay the $150 membership and who would ask quite reasonably we dont you give it people that actually support the team by funding free entry at an away game at Telstra. And to top it off you build up crowd support for the opposition against us. Dean Bailey and the coaching team would love that. I would expect our sponsors would have something to say about it to and it would not be positive or conducive to future relationships. Your beer drinking contest looks a pearler compared with this clanger. Why dont you hold it before the start of the QBW game where the Collingwood members get free entry and lets give em a free beer as well. Its the least we can do before MFC disappears out of existence. You have categorically disproven that above. Proactive is what the Board has been doing and the incoming Board will hopefully do. Just lets not be reckless about it. If the Club deserves suggestions like some you put forward we are deserving of very little indeed.

He had a hip injury a couple of weeks ago. Moloney should be put on the long term injury list for this year (Hant he been there before?) and they should elevated Grimes off the LT injury list. At seasons end they wont delist Moloney. He is not tradeable but his future contract terms are negotiable.

Losses are reflection of your expenses being greater than your income and the continuation of such losses ulitimately need to be financed by more equity or further debt to sustain the equation. In the case of MFC either more AFL handouts or borrowings. Long term neither are sustainable.

Obviously if the AFL proposed a financial alternative that was sensible MFC should consider at it. However any financial accomodation that is dependent on the AFL is fraught with uncertainty of tenure and comes with strings attached. Any compensation that is offered not only has to cover gate receipts but also the money lost because of lack of corporate entertainment and sponsorship exposure.

Correct. I thought he just spelled out some commonsense about the assumptions and beliefs being bandied as fact about ex-players. I know him as well as I know either of you Franky or Rogue. B)

What happens when you are slow and you dont have the ball and the opposition does?

Why do you need to misinterpret my posts about the QBW game to make a point? We are not solely dependent on the QBW game but it is important stream of revenue for the Club. Our survical depends upon a number of streams of income which if we lose one stream is not easily replaced by another. No one has their head in the sand about this...the Club has to fight for every benefit. So what are these other options that you seem to think are so readily available? What do you think this and successive administrations have been seeking to do? Give you a clue...our Club is financially on the cliff's edge. How much closer are you happy to tip it by not fighting to retain that match and its proceeds? I'd suggest you work on your beer drinking contests. You can say did something while you make up fantasies about what needs to be done at the MFC and tell all around the barrel how easy it is.

Even the basics of playing for the team and taking the best options. He played well up to 3 Qtr time but as others said he undid it all at the crucial time and often. He faulted 3 times at not kicking to a better option. He was not rushed. It was deliberate. Do you think he might have thought about his actions after the first two? Some of the excuses put up for this are as poor as the actions themselves. Bruce is well ahead of Yze.

We are in financial trouble and the QBW game prevents it being worse. It is an important source of income that cant be easily replaced. Given the financial chasm we are in how could your observation be a bigger problem? Alternating the home games will do nothing to address the "issue" you spoke of. That issue can be dealt with separately Lets cross that bridge when we come to it. Rather than rolling over and playing doggy, how about we outline the financial impacts upon us by taking that away. Alternation is a fall back position not a bargaining position. If we cannot save the QBW round for us, i would suggest our cards for the future are heavily marked by the AFL. I have an idea. We could petition the AFL to provide us with the QBW home game as compensation for tossing us interstate so often. pitching games on Mothers Day and denying us Friday night. If they take away our QBW entitlements we are not in a driving seat to push anything. Roll over doggy! Here boy. The Club has never sat on its laurels over the MFC QBW game. You must have been away for some time if you think the Club has not explored a wide array of options There arent any easy fixes and easy ways around this. This is about the Club's survival and you dont want to fight for that. We have not lost the QBW game and the MFC administration should be fighting for that game and all other fixtures. The only one bemoaning the loss is your wet blanket self.

Go and do the home work as you cant obviously count what happens in one game. His last quarter was appalling particularly from a player who is a leader of the Club. No other club would tolerate such a "me first" player for so long. Yze selfish behaviour is only topped by ignorant apologists who go into states of myopic denial everytime he does it.

Great, so how do we make up the hole that the lack of gate takings results? As an away game we lose the right to market before the game, half time and the breaks at a marquee event in the AFL calendar. The loss of the home game does not guarantee us anything from the AFL not another MCG game and not necessarily another crowd pulling game. There is no evidence that alternating the home games is the only way. The AFL screws us on the draw and owes it to us to "support" us. Good knows they give so many fixture benefits to Collingwood already. Gimmicks will not get us an extra 60,000 a year. Please promise me you are not on Stynes ticket. With vision like that a financial train wreck beckons.

If MFC had been in the 8 it would have drawn higher numbers from both Clubs. This year the proceeds from that match are more important than ever. Unless people have been living in a cave for the past 10 years and certainly for the past 12 months, they will know MFC is financial trouble. We are in a financial hole with or without the QBW games. Without it the hole is bigger and deeper. The review of the other games has been happening in the past with the Breast cancer initiative. The initiatives you speak can be investigated without needlessly sacrificing the QBW especially if we are going with such widely popular events as beer drinking contests given the current community concern about binge drinking. Guaranteed to bring them through the doors

We arent solely relying on it and to imply that is off the mark. No one at MFC is solely relying on this game to draw in the crowd and money. However it is an important source of money and exposure and the Club should fight tooth and nail to keep it as part of a lopsided and biased draw. There is alot of hard work and no low lying fruit to turn around MFC fortunes. Why give up an important one? There is no evidence that taking the QBW as an MFC home game will arrest complacency nor increase spectator involvement. It could easily do the opposite. And we would have an additional hole in our finances where funding and income sources are hard to come by. Make that shooting ourselves in both feet..twice.

I am actually a big supporter of Lyon and know what he can do. I raised that to challenge the view as to how much he does behind the scenes. Many posters have made comments as to how much and frankly they would not know unless they were in the inner sanctum. They are not. I have no problem with a clash of commitments. Just a lack of awareness of a major Club event that has been publicised for some time frm someone who is behind the scenes. Keep misreading and misinterpreting D3. Marvellous