Rhino Richards

He'd make the bench of our best 22 at best. I am concerned that Neitz has waited this long to determine if he wants to be Captain in 2008. He has been a very good leader at the Club over the 8 years in the job but I think its time for a change and for Neitz to focus on getting the most out of his final season with the Club. Whether its the 150 year or not, MFC has to look beyond the ceremonial and look to the next generation of leaders.

Buddy Franklin tore MFC apart in the last quarter of the 2007 pre season cup at Telstra dome. FWIW, Warnock was on Franklin in the last quarter. But in due respect of the situation, MFC's underdone midfield were overrun in the last quarter and Franklin stylishly finished off the hard work of others up the ground.

Alternatively do we tell our existing major sponsor to p1$$ off and lose their sizeable sponsorship and incur all the bad blood in the industry for doing that. As a small club we struggle for sponsors and that would not be the way to go. I dont think it is as simplistic as you would like it to be. A major sponssor is your primary sponsor and enjoys precedent promotion opporutunities from their association with MFC. If MFC have a contractual agreement already with a major sponsor, it will depend upon that contract and what conditions TAC want for their $300,000. If it could be accomodated with the existing arrangements as a secondary sponsor then fine. But you are whistling dixie, if you think TAC will want to go from being a major sponsor at a big crowd pulling club and being a secondary sponsor at a small club with poor exposure and support. I dont see the sense. And if TAC do then they will price the downgrade accordingly. $300,000 would be a steal for MFC. I bet for the same money TAC could achieve its objectives better elsewhere through another Club

Agreed and well said Nasher.

If PJ is going to make it, its going to be as a ruckman. And here he struggles. The heat is on Jamar PJ and Meesen to step up. All three wont be on the list at year end if they dont perform. He wont cut it purely up forward or back longer term.

Thanks Jack for the clarification. We can put our best foot forward. I hope it is better than the other clubs.

The kid is 19. He made a poor judgement and then is subject to public condemnation on the front page of the daily media. He did the wrong thing and should and will be punished in other ways. But FCS, Dick Pratt was never put through the same personal scrutiny. Now there is a crime where there should be a lynching. While TAC is free to seek what forms of sponsorship it chooses, I dont like there process of directly sponsoring an AFL club. I think it leaves them exposed on certain contingent events. And based on the demographics of the AFL these events do and will happen. The TAC seems to get some satisfaction from dragging the Club and the player through the media ringer as putting across their message. To me it only highlights the media circus and by the road toll figures that mode of message is not working too well. If the sponsorship money is there, MFC should try and win it if it can. I am not sure how a small drawing club like MFC will suit TAC's broadcast of their message.

Deanox, Every Club has behaviour clauses in their contracts which already imply your objective. However, young men still stuff up. The taxi vouchers just wont stop the stupidity that plagues some men in their 20s. They would have be of little use to the Collingwood player who has been crucified for the misdemeanour. By the way who said we were any chance to get the TAC deal? Has it been re-offered by TAC?

So far TAC have been lucky with minor incidents. What if player(s) from a TAC Sponsored Club were involved in a serious multi car accident with a number of fatalities. How stupid would TAC look for pouring money into a Club like that? Surely there must be better ways for them to send a message than to have a young bloke publicly humiliated for an action which although illegal is hardly due the public lynching that the media puts them through. There are far worse crimes that dont get the media execution. Every time I read about one of these incidents each Club must have a sense of "by the grace of God go I". I hope that MFC can avoid some of these pitfalls.

I am not sure how you can draw any inference on the Club's intentions especially from an unnamed source at a BBQ. If we dont make the 8 this year for the second year, how is our list most definitely top 8? How will this reflect poorly on the coaching staff if we dont make the 8? With the exception of Paul Williams, there has been a complete clean out of the coaching staff since the end of last season. One of the first steps has been the clean out of deadwood off the 2007 list. There is likely to be more at the end of 2008. They have been replaced by new recruits who with the exception of Meesen cannot reasonably be expected to have a big impact this year. All the better they do if they are given the chance. FWIW, Hannibal has got it about right in evaluating comments from "inside sources" at a BBQ

How many Clubs would want to give up their trade picks for a resume that says "trier, good heart, a great clubman, not that skilled" and what would they realistically give? Further, why would the Club have sought to trade a KPP that was potentially establishing himself when we were chronically short of KPPs?

Here is a trivia quiz question: Which two particpants in the 1964 Premiers' match were also involved in Test Cricket matches in Australia at a later date?

I went soft on him this time!! I suspect your position is not much different to mine and I hope DB does pull a rabbit out of the hat and turn the player around. It will be a bonus for the Club if DB does.

I think Sylvin answered the first question and I think Miller has a chance this year to make it at AFL level. I am not sure where that position is. 1 to 2 years ago I thought Miller had a better chance down back but I have not been enthused. Carroll is a stopgap fullback at best and is clearly warming the spot for someone else. They will both have there days up back but by the end of 2008, I suspect we will know more about Miller's capacity for AFL and hopefully Frawley has stepped up in front of Carroll.

The sacking of Smith was one more serious nail in the coffin for MFC especially after they let their heart and soul in Barassi just walk out the door. Bush, if you have any good articles on the Barassi deaprture at the end of 1964 it would be a good read.

Miller was a one trick pony who picked up cheap possessions on the centre wing that rarely hurt the opposition. He was useless within the 50 mtre arc and struggled to win a contest. Despite being a dedicated player with solid attitude and good athleticism, his lack of football smarts condemns him either up forward or down back. There has been alot of talk about DB being the "messiah" to change Miller around. I hope Bailey's style of coacching does have a positive impact on Miller. I am not confident about that. Agree. I also dont see Rivers playing in the last line of defence either. Frawley for mine.

I have a copy of the 1958 book that my parents gave me years ago. It is a good read taken at a time when the CLub was powerful and successful. An interesting perspective. The 1983 book is pretty ordinary read with some focus on players since 1958 who do not deserve the amount of book space devoted to them. Its also replete with the awful red and royal blue guernsey photos. Lynda Carroll's book on the 140 years is better. I am looking forward to the 150 years book.

Outstanding and informative read, Bush Demon. Keep it coming. Its interesting about Smith's outlook for 1965. Despite his optimism, history will show that MFC were at the end of their golden run and while only 2 players retired from the 1964 premiership team, few of the stars of that year shone in 1965 and hardly any of the new players went onto become stars. Fascinating read and I hope there is alot more in the scrapbook

State of Origin to a national game like AFL these days is as relevant as the place kick. In regard to your idea. Well done for thinking outside the square. However, I dont like it as it firstly draws attention away from the AFL Finals (AFL will not want that and I would agree with that view). SOO teams will be made up of players of the not so good sides and that time of year many of the sides are the walking wounded by the end of August Many players opt to have their various medical operations to repair nagging injuries in time for the next season pre season. I also share Nashers views on the Allies. A SOO series has about about as much importance as the failed Irish hybrid series. And in regard to your idea, if their are two WA, two SA, Sydney and Brisbane in the finals you will barely scrape enough fit players together from the other sides to form an Allies cricket XI. No thanks.

Agree. Next

My issue with Robbo is that in the past two years he has failed to put defensive pressure when he does not win the ball on the first contest. I think the game has changed in the past 3 years and demands from all players that they pressure the ball carrier. However over the course of his career, Robbo has been a great clubman who has maximised his strengths and work on and overcome some of his weakness. We drafted him so late in the draft and he has played 200+ games, Club b+f and was in contention for AA a few years back. That is a pretty good return for CAC on that pick.

Agree. While the Club seemed harsh on Smith, Smith was the not the easiest person to work with. As his achievements were well noted, his sometime tempestuous moods rankled players and officials. After 11 years, some of these issues begin to wear hard. At the end 1964, MFC was tired on and off the field after a stellar 11 years and 6 flags. The game was changing from the rules and protocols that MFC dominated by for so long. Barassi going was just the start. If we are going to offer apologies, I would like to include Alves, Hardeman and Wells. The Club treated their few champions of that era like cheap meat.

Occo you have put up a fine rebuttal to rather flaky argument. However, while I am not great fan of Brad Miller, he was pick 55 in the 2001 draft and has played 90+ games. Admittedly some have not been as good as others. But hell, if you can get that many games out of a 4th round pick then its hard to call that an error. There are many at pick 5 that dont play more than 10 games. You are right about Pickett. The strategy was right but the player did not deliver. Who set the strategy? ......The Coach. The same could be said for Holland. We needed a player that could be a KPP with immediate impact. He has been serviceable. As far as a waste of a pick. Which KPP would we have gone for with pick 20 that would have done better? As far as I am concerned the 2003 draft has not delivered at the top, middle, bottom ends. I struggle to see how Holland could be a waste of a pick when no KPP taken after pick 20 in that year has delivered anything.

He is there to fulfil a short term role while others develop. Had either Garland or Frawley had been ready now then you would probably be right.

Thanks Mo64 for the clarification.