Rhino Richards

Unfortunately not chasing the opportunity at MFC.

Money is always a consideration. Its not just what you offer but what a potential candidate wants. There are some jobs no money would get me near if I was appropriately qualified. I guess the question is "How attractive is an unfinancial high profile Club with a limited supporter base?" The answer to question 1 was posted by Nasher some time ago which dispelled a few myths that haunt the AFL's financial support to MFC. The answer to question 2 is most definitely if the Club is not able to competently operate as a football club within agreed financial budgets. The worse a Club is operationally and/or financially the more involved the AFL is. FWIW, MFC got a please explain when it first advised that it would not meet its budgets. Also the AFL can work mystically behind the scenes where a Club does not fulfil its overall plan.

Its a matter of whos available and willing and being prepared to pay the market rates to get that person. I dont buy the value for money proposition. From my experience, if you pay peanuts etc etc. If you save a couple of bucks appointing a monkey you pay them out in multiples as consequence of their poor performance. Its a false economy for such an important position. I dont believe Harris was a "value for money" appointment but there were areas of concern that impacted the bottom line that were definitely his responsibility. I am glad he is going. Jaded, there were a number of issues that impacted the results some which Harris could not control some which were definitely his issues. Bottom line profit is but one key performance measure of a CEO. There are other measures besides financial and Harris appeared to struggle with those. I hope the Club gets the CEO appointment right. Its a very important role than does not get the profile of other roles.

He bares the ultimate responsibility for the outcome. I hope they get someone more capable for the role than Harris.

BBP, In a midfield with Black, Lappin and Power, the attention on TJ might not be as great and he might do better. However, most teams know how damaging he could be but they know how to cut his influence. And then there is the off field..... I just think MFC made a reasonable call that given all on field and off field issues considered they were better getting market value for him now rather than risk two more so-so years where his market value would have diminished considerably.

And I wonder how much Frawley, Weetra and Garland know with limited or no AFL football experience and only 12 months in the system.

Could not agree more with that Fan. I am sure Brad Green will rightfully return to the leadership while others in the Group may be found out in due course.

That was one issue. If he could not have found a target outside 50 why didn't he use up his time allotment on the initial kick in and rush a behind and then call for a lead from his next kick in. We had to maintain possession of the pill. He kicked to a MFC player contested by 2 Kangas players. If that was not enough, when the boundary throw in was had, there was no MFC crumber standing goal side of the throw in where a young Kangas player received the ball ran his full distance and goaled. Where was TJ? Standing 10 metres out from the goal square not picking up anyone. Had he done so he could have contested the fall of the tap out to negate opposition possession and force another ball up and the erosion of remaining time. Surely a top level player with 10 years experience should have exhibited more nous and experience. It was also amazing that no other MFC player thought of those issues as well. Its not just a TJ gripe but he was a primary culprit in this matter and should have done much more.

I am sure from the interview that attitude and determination were not weak points for Brad Green. I would be interested to know what DB's leadership criteria. I had thought Green had it all over some other more fancied players. I do note that DB said "DB stated that the issue of ‘leadership’ is one that is subject to on-going review, ie it is not just a one off process, it is one that must be shown/demonstrated on and off the field." So there is hope for Green. I just wonder how he was not adjudged at meeting that criteria.

I think the issue is with someone filming video at training. I can understand the concern about that especially where the practice session involves match play sessions. How do you know what other Clubs do in regard closed sessions? In fact it is a common practice for Clubs to adopt hand in glove tactics involving practice sessions.

Thanks for the comprehensive summary Phile. A good and informative read.

You will note that earlier I suggested he might pinch hit roles in the side dependent upon form. I have suggested that given the changes in the game that there is added onus on areas where Yze is not traditionally strong. If he does not change these issues IMO he will struggle over the course of a season. 2 goals a game is different to 44 goals in a season. He might get the former but will battle for the latter unless he can address the issues above. Unfortunately the AA is judged on criteria in addition to the number of goals kicked. I seem to recall the 2nd,3rd and 4th efforts of Johnson far exceeding those of Yze. I further recall that when people say Yze was good for a couple of goals in a game, they often forget that his direct opponent has run off him countless times and picked a swathe of uncontested possessions to benefit of the opposition.

Fair enough. He is a committed and passionate sort of guy and there would be times that when MFC have played less so over the past 3 years it does not look good. FWIW, in his book Alves felt that he was shafted by individual executives at St Kilda not the Club. At MFC, he with other loyal top players felt shafted over a long period of time. In the end of the bitterness of the split for Alves would have been the final straw. I have heard him on radio state that he was more Saints that Demons. Maybe MFC will give him reason to praise this year!!

Current contract (3 years) finishes at the end of the year.

The lack of on field leadership that day in the heat of the last quarter and the failure of experienced footballers to perform the basic lock down strategies in defence was appalling.

If nothing has changed, he is finished. Once again it is being prepared to put your body over the ball when your time comes. Its not about physical aggression. His skills have diminished steadily over the past 5 years. He is not the player he was in 2002 when he had the skills and the youth to cut corners and get away with it. The game has changed dramatically in that time (even in the past 3 years). The game is faster and there is more and more focus on player accountability and applying pressure on the ball carrier when you dont have the ball. Yze gets found out there. If he cant do the above and be committed to a contested ball then he is going to know TBO far better than he does now.

Adem Yze 187cm 85kgs Simon Godfrey 184cm 86kgs Nathan D Brown 180cm 80kgs James McDonald 180cm 75kgs Brad Green 184 cm 84 kgs Its not about bash and crash! Its about being prepared to put your body over the ball. Body shape has nothing to do with it!

I am not sure where the chip is on the shoulder Jack but the issue of where Alves played his football is irrelevant to his view on the current state of the Club or they way they play when he watches them. The way the Club performed recently there has been much for a commentator to lament. We have a habit of playing poor football when 774 cover us! FWIW, I think Maclure has been extremely blunt about some of the core issues at the Club. He has been pretty much to the point.

If he still capable, whereever he can add value to MFC. He may be pinch hitting roles this year. If he is not up to scratch then he will provide leadership to young players by example through dishing out bone jarring tackles on the opposition at TBO.

Well Done Stan! As a player I admired your leadership and your spirit. As a commentator, I enjoy your passion and your enthusiasm for the game. I am not sure why you owe any favoured comments about MFC. Its a pity that the Club shafted you (and other top players) so many years ago

Nor other Clubs. I believe there were no takers.

Could it have been for more than one incident?? Do you actually know what he has done?? It would seem to me that such a penalty would not have been levied had not Carroll already breached a number of conditions.

How do you know that? The newly formed Leadership Group - consisting of David Neitz, Adem Yze, Russell Robertson, James McDonald, Cameron Bruce, Brad Miller and Brock McLean - came to the decision to suspend Nathan after he showed a lack of professionalism in preparation for the 2008 season. Do you know what the terms of the lack of professionalism in the preparation were?

I think you are just about right Tigger. However, regardless of his technique, Frawley is still a capable kick. Dont let the action blur the outcome.

And it was also at a Lionel Ritchie concert. So there were mitigating circumstances. Brock was on the leadership group that disciplined Pickett last year. I think it is good that he is there frankly.