xarronn

Are you guys being fair to Lyon? I presume you are both aware of his mental health battles in 2016, - some memory, (or knowledge) lapses in that context don't seem deal breakers to me. In the context of the questions he was asking when referring to those games, (knowing what to expect from the team, win or lose and Hogan's mindset), they make no difference at all. By the way, in the SEN interview he said " nearly beating West Coast", - so he corrected himself.

I found this post in a quick search on Demonland, it suggests that he did get an additional two years rather than three. poita replied to rpfc's topic in Melbourne Demons ...Really disappointed that the club has not come out and justified theTerlichcontract either given that one year contracts are in vogue at present. Why wasDean given two years on the back of an underwhelming 2014 season? How many memberships are covering the cost of hiscontract? PS. I actually li... October 28, 2015

Because it is the off season and in the interests of accuracy, this is what I recollect about Terlich and his contracts. Terlich was in the top 5 in the B&F in 2013 - his first year. In his second year he dropped off quite a bit in possessions and was dropped from the team about two thirds of the way through the season, - maybe after suffering a concussion. (His disposal and especially his decision making were of course always questionable, but his courage was not). He received a two year contract at the end of 2014. This greatly surprised me at the time, particularly when he was not picked for any AFL games in 2015. However I think the club knew that was probably going to be the case, but they wanted players to stiffen up Casey,- which lacked hardened bodies and had a very poor and demoralizing year in 2014. They certainly wouldn't have wanted to subject Crossy to a year of VFL football, as well as Terlich being a lot cheaper. So I reckon there was method in the madness of the muppets who gave him that contract.

And lost another by 4 points, so could easily have had 2, (or none)! When you factor in the drug culture at West Coast, who can really tell how well he did as a coach. Not sure how perceptive Wallsy is, amongst other prediction failures, he was pretty hot on Melbourne's future in 2010 and 2011, (maybe because he was on the selection panel for Bails).

189cm actually.

Oops, I must admit I didn't. In that case the MFC and the AFL are dirty B******S!!

I'm no lover of Essendon and certainly wish them a mediocre season, but George you have been way too pessimistic about them. They won 3 games in 2016, how do you imagine they will perform as poorly, (or worse), in 2017 Only four players will start the season 30 or over, they uncovered several young players last year and of course players will return in 2017. Those players may not be at their best but at least 5 of them will make a significant improvement to the team, - Heppel, Hooker, Hurley, Colyer and Howlett. Apart from Roosey, which coach doesn't get sacked at some stage. You're drawing a long bow in writing off Worsfold. He apparently played a big role at Adelaide in 2015, when they lost their coach and is well respected.

I see no problem or such an implication. I think it's finding the devil where none exists. The announcement is only stating the obvious order of things. The Merchandise stall will be open from early on and right until the end, whereas the players will only be available after training has concluded. Later posts attribute the imagined ills of this announcement to the AFL. Come on, since when have football clubs not had to raise money, it happens at all levels and all sports. In the end, if players were willing to play, coaches and support staff willing to provide their services and administrators willing to administer for peanuts, then costs would be much lower, but we would still like to see a large group of supporters in obvious support of the club by wearing its paraphernalia.

Spot on, agree with every word. LH, Patrick Smith is the only person in the media who corrected the mistruths or spin which have been put out by, Amendola, Hird Snr, Corcoran, Pickering and Warner. That was the point of his article. He would not have written this article at all were it not for what seems like a concerted effort to re-write events, by these Hird supporters. As for your bolded statement, I would really love to know what more you would have wanted Smith to say regarding his condition and what is the difference that it would make anyway? In my eyes he made the necessary PC statement of concern, what more is needed? I would assume that James Hird will get plenty of support from his family and friends and the best treatment money can buy. There is no need for anyone to express concern that is not genuinely felt. Neither his condition nor his recovery is dependent on a few more sympathetic words any of us might utter.

I agree with both posts about Corcoran. Let's also remember something else, by trying to attribute fault elsewhere, Corcoran is also trying to mitigate his culpability, retrospectively. I'm not sure what he is doing for a buck these days but you can bet it's not as lucrative as his jobs in the footy industry. As they say, always back self-interest even when it seems to be wrapped in a cloak of compassion. Another thing about Corcoran. He was employed by Melbourne, - I think as Football Manager when he had a falling out with Sheedy. He brought with him files on possible recruits that the Essendon recruiting team had collected. He was not entitled to take that Intellectual Property and Essendon took legal action to force him to return it. He was our man at that time but that gives an insight into his character. Buck Nekkid, are you not aware of the penalties imposed on the club by the AFL and the fact that all the prominent officials (other than Reid) are gone? How then does your statement that they let them get away with it stand up? As for the first bolded statement. Australian Football is a very small fish. There is only one Professional body for the sport, - maybe you are happy to cripple the sport and the competition by destroying a club, but I doubt that most people would forgive an AFL commission which permitted that to happen. Time passes quickly, but don't forget this issue has derailed the EFC for 4 years. ( And whilst writing this I remembered that they were kicked out of the 2013 finals, - another club penalty). Surely there have been enough consequences for Essendon to both penalise that club and to educate and deter future infractions from all clubs, - at least for a decade.

Wrecker 45, I am responding to your statement bolded above. America de Calli had already made the point below: "How can you believe he is the scapegoat when just about everyone else in positions of responsibility at Essendon were sacked or resigned swiftly? It took untill the bitter end and millions of dollars in his pocket to get Hird out of the club". However Wrecker45, you responded to his post as though you didn't read it, so I am again rebutting your statement that: "Hird could have handled it better but I truly think he his a pawn that the AFL needed to hang everything on. Particularly, after he wouldn't cop the slap on the wrist they were offering". You are again ignoring all the other casualties at the club which were mentioned by AdC, you are ignoring the fact that Essendon was fined $2 mill, you are ignoring that it lost draft picks, you are ignoring that the players were suspended for 12 months, (albeit by a WADA tribunal) and retired players had to step aside from coaching and other positions. You are ignoring the fact that the club is shelling out millions in compensation to the players. You are ignoring that Watson has lost his Brownlow. Hird himself resigned as coach before the player suspensions because the players were no longer performing for him. This was not a penalty imposed by the AFL. He kept going to independent courts and losing, so how can he be a pawn of the AFL. After all this, how then is he the scapegoat that the AFL needed to hang everything on? You yourself say"he wouldn't cop the slap on the wrist they were offering". So he was offered a slap on the wrist but 'he is a scapegoat"? (I know you say it happened because he wouldn't accept the slap, but that is still contradictory). Hird is just one of the many and continuing casualties of this program. By definition if there are so many other casualties, Hird cannot be a scapegoat As it happens, my view is also that he didn't intend to break the rules, but that is not a defense when the rules were broken under his watch and as a result of a program he instituted. He had responsibilities and he amongst others had to be accountable, - the Cronulla coach copped a suspension, what penalty did Hird get from the AFL which was worse?

Surely DC means Ajax - 'the so-called "White Tornado'.

Magner and Couch don't fit into this scenario. They were both taken as mature age rookies, and no other club picked them up before or after us. Couch was a second round selection and Magner a third round selection. Couch played with Collingwood in the VFL and Magner got a gig with Essendon in the NAB cup when they needed replacements at the beginning of 2015, so they had a chance to see him first hand. Both were poor kicks and pretty slow, especially Couch. Neither failed because of the Melb FC's shortcomings, rather the fact they got a chance at all was because of the clubs shortcomings.

This is: 'the-bombers-doping-saga-the-fat-lady-sings' thread. Not the James Hird thread, why would it be locked? You do realise that this was reignited by statements made by Stephen Amendola in Saturdays Herald-Sun and Allan Hird on 3AW and TV. The discussion now is about their hypocrisy in coming out with the old malarkey and allegations at a time when Hird's wife and others were saying leave him alone. Saturdays article included a false statement that the AFL had blocked Hird being employed by SEN. This was refuted by both the AFL and SEN and published, but in a much smaller article on Tuesday. Hird senior probably based his allegation that the AFL was still harassing his son on that 'false news' article. Amendola is trying to cover his a**e, (following all the poor advice he have Hird), by again blaming everyone else, - as did Hird senior. Both the Amendola and Hird senior statements were sickening and shouldn't be allowed to pass uncontested.

Chris, I am really curious to know where you think the AFL could / should be heading "under the guidance of someone good". It seems as though you have must have thought about that given your comment.

NFL has 32 teams and play 16 games. For much of its history the VFL had 12 teams and played 18 games , - only 5 teams played each other twice. I've agreed about the salaries of CEO's, but that just confirms that he is getting about the going rate. I'm not having a go at your circumstances, but seriously, how is the bolded comment relevant to the CEO's salary and this thread?

SWYL, amazing, you have managed to turn silk purses into sow's ears. I won't comment on each of your points but the bolded one is fascinating. You think we have too many teams because you haven't got time to watch 9 games each week? How many games a week can you watch? I wonder why the EPL, NFL, NBA etc etc haven't cottoned on to that idea? The A- League have 5 games each week and the damned fools are talking about expanding to a much larger competition! As for the general topic of AFL CEO's, If Gil and his predecessor a so abhorrent, who was the last good CEO and why? How is it that the AFL, according to most posters on this thread gets the dregs? The Commissioners who make the appointments, whilst in their other roles seem to be clever and successful, must be transformed into drongo's once they are appointed! Whilst I agree that CEO salaries are extremely high, (too high), that is the case in all western economies. Taking pot shots at the AFL CEO's salary without putting it in context of other CEO salaries is no basis for a rational discussion. If readers are interested these links will provide some context: This is from Feb 2016: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/why-cant-the-nrl-find-a-ceo-20160218-gmx9t0.html This is from 2014: http://www.afr.com/business/salary-survey-2014--meet-australias-bestpaid-ceos-20141209-123pii His salary is not off the scale relatively. It seems to me that many of the criticisms of McLachlan expressed in this thread are based on personal dislike of him. Why is his appearance and manner of speaking of any consequence if people are attacking his salary?

Think it was against Essendon in Rd 10 of 2012. He kicked two or three. It was a low scoring game and our first win of the year. I think Essendon were 8w & 1L at the time and either top or close to. We started their decline, which may have been co-incidental with the PEDs starting to backfire. What a magnificent win that was. What is incomprehensible is, we beat them in 2012 and 2014 against the odds, but lost in 2015 and 2016 when we were big favourites. Hopefully that is the past.

Completely agree with bolded section, but I don't agree that it is just "the next best thing". How would our own standalone VFL club be any different. We largely bankroll Casey, appoint the coaches, have exactly the same number of VFL listed players as Collingwood or Geelong etc. They will now play in our jumper and be called the Demons. Justin Plapp has created a genuine bond between the AFL list and the VFL list and we've recruited two of their players for 2017, showing that there is a genuine pathway through this affiliation. It is our club!

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-09-23/no-priority-pick-for-demons Not trying to point score, but it was 2014 as it happens. (I remember Roosy buying into it, when previous to coaching us he was completely against it). Fully agree with last sentence. I appreciate that we had a civil exchange of views on the issue of Gil and the other matters.

The Jobe issue: If I'm not mistaken that fell into the Commission's scope. I don't think you can sheet that home to him. In any case, I believe it was obvious to both Gil and the Commission that he had to lose it, but they decided to do it their way. In the end the right outcome was achieved. I have no sympathy for Jobe and don't think he did anything heroic, courageous or noble by giving it back before he was told to. Don't forget he had a number of prominent supporters arguing he should keep it, (including the AFLPA, Robbo, and a former Brownlow medallist. I think the way it was done will allow Mitchell and Cotchin to receive their medals with far less controversy and I am really pleased about that, as they are fully deserving. The broader Essendon issue: Again, I'm pretty sure the Commission had a big role in this. I also happen to believe the players didn't set out to cheat, they were victims, - but that is just their bad luck. (Again no sympathy from me). Remember the Cronulla players and club got away with far less than what happened to Essendon. Of course the AFL was fought all the way by Hird, the club and the players. You can add to that list the AFLPA and the 'great Civil Rights lawyer Julian Burnside, (who also claimed Hird's human rights were being breached). Turning up to Torquay: I've had my say about that in previous posts, its a matter of opinion, but I don't see it as a sign of incompetence, it was his considered decision. Priority Pick: Was it after 2013 or 2014? Because he was appointed CEO at the end of April 2014. Either way, I recall that the grounds for a priority pick were deliberately kept secret, (and still are), so they couldn't be gamed by clubs. I think it would have been controversial to give us a priority pick then, but we got a pretty could result for the Frawley free agency move. I always felt there was some effort to compensate us there. I'm not convinced that he is useless, nor that he is a Dill.

It seems that people in positions of responsibility will invariably cop criticism and whilst I'm not in a position to say he is terrific, I'm really puzzled by this comment. On the basis of the bolded segments we obviously have Bozo the Clown as the current AFL CEO, surely then the worst CEO in Australia! R & B, can you illustrate his failings in respect to each of those criticisms with examples to enlighten me?

My responses to the bolded segments in order. Point 3, I was replying to your criticism of his using time to call Mike Sheahan's daughter. ( Quote from Herald Sun article - “Gillon had seen me play when I was younger and I was his tennis coach, so he knew what I was like,” Sheahan said), so apart from anything else, he knew her personally. How hard to pop in to Torquay: I'm not going to to argue that it's some impossible thing, but it is 3 hours to just travel there and back for some glad handing. Last bolded segment, the quote from Dangerfield: Let's not forget that Dangerfield is also acting as the PR face of the AFLPA. This is part of the strategy to portray the players as wronged and downtrodden as they battle the AFL ogre. I see it as an attempt to get public opinion more onside.

1. He clearly is not one of the negotiators. 2. These negotiations have been going on for quite a while. He would be updated regularly on the state of play, for what purpose would he 'pop'in? 3. Not that it matters, but how do you know he didn't make the call in his time? 4. Are you saying he is not allowed to allocate some of his time to women's footy? This is a new addition to the CEO's responsibilities.

Chris Dawes playing for Sorrento in 2017. Don't know if this has been brought up before: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/localfooty/mpnfl/sorrento-lands-prized-recruits-andrew-lovett-and-chris-dawes/news-story/4e9062fde039049ad1bbaddc18c04dd9