titan_uranus

Have a listen to the interview he did on 3AW before the Gold Coast game in Round 3, available here: https://www.3aw.com.au/what-the-melbourne-president-thought-of-simon-goodwins-comments-about-max-gawn/ Around 25 mins into the longer of the two clips. He gets introduced as interim president but tries to cut Tim Lane off to correct him that he’s not interim, he’s president for 12 months under a succession plan. IIRC he did other radio interviews that day where he said the same thing.

AFAIK Laurie doesn’t have to consent, we can delist him if we want, but we must pay him what he’s owed for next year. We can’t really afford to be paying Laurie whatever his contract allows for next year to have him play VFL or whatever. It’s terrible list management IMO.

Green did “bristle”, markedly, in a series of radio interviews earlier this year when he was described as “interim president”. He steadfastly said he was not interim.

Hiding to nothing today. No one will bat an eyelid if we win, even by 60+. A loss will be disastrous. Really just want to see intensity from all, and some promise from the kids.

According to Caro in her article this morning, McVee “looks likely to depart”. This is one of the strangest situations I can recall. Every indication is that he wants out except for the complete opposite indication coming from@Ghostwriter and @Dannyz .

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-fractured-football-club-behind-melbourne-s-eight-seconds-of-madness-20250731-p5mjc5.html Have at it. IMO, it’s an unsurprising piece which fairly highlights the lack of leadership everywhere at the club, on and off field.

Believing that an injured best 23 player “offers more” than three players who have barely been given a go at AFL level is a reasonably big part of our predicament. And your post doesn’t really address mine anyway - how is backing in the tried and true consistent with “leaving no stone unturned”?

Laurie being contracted for next year but not being played all year despite being fit sums up a lot of what is wrong with our list management.

That’s right, there’s no such thing as a dead rubber. As Goodwin has repeatedly said, we’re leaving no stone unturned, and we’re in a hurry to improve. So why are we not using this as an opportunity to give him a week off and give his spot to Laurie, or Brown, or Woewodin, or to increase Rivers’ or Langford’s or Windsor’s centre bounce rotations, etc? We have an unfortunate recent history of players playing poorly only for it to be revealed post game that they were sick or injured. It just happened with Trac. It happened with Gawn earlier this year too. We also have a history of players leaving the club due to a lack of opportunity and becoming best 23 players elsewhere (Jordon, Bedford, Harmes, Baker, Corey Wagner). Playing Viney on the basis that he can just “deal with the pain” is inconsistent with “leaving no stone unturned”.

He actually did say this, which stood out to me. He said “we get another opportunity this week against a football club to show - not talk - show what we’re about”. I’d say that concept, of doing what we need to do and not just saying we’ll do it, came up internally this week, as that’s often what ends up coming through in his pressers.

Great to see Culley get a game. Dropping Spargo absolutely the right call. But we’re sticking fat with the same core players, as is this FD’s way. Meanwhile Viney has a broken wrist. Perhaps we rest him and give someone else a go? Nah, of course not. (Sigh).

Winning 4 of their last 5 games is the worst thing that could happen to St Kilda IMO. They are going nowhere, having beaten just us (twice) over the last 12 weeks, and in one of those games finding themselves 46 points down to us. They were, as you say, rubbish for 75% of the game. Late season wins against bottom 4 sides might feel nice but will paper over the cracks, and Ross Lyon will yet again escape scrutiny for another failed year. At the very least, our collapse is forcing the blowtorch onto us.

Probably worth noting the club is leaking again, given the “senior Melbourne” sources Gleeson cites in the article. In this instance I doubt any of us mins though.

Some important parts of this article: “Melbourne is determined to make significant changes this year after another season that has spiralled into misery. There is a harder edge to Melbourne’s decision-making this year and the potential of a payout for Goodwin or other contracted staff will not be an impediment to change should they decide it is required. Goodwin’s position remains under serious threat at season’s end, and possibly sooner should the club lose to bottom of the ladder West Coast at the weekend... Board member Steven Smith, who will take over as club president from Brad Green later in the year, joined the meeting by conference call from Europe. While the board did not settle on what its next course of action will be, it was agreed that significant changes to the football department are needed. The timing of decisions on those changes will not be reliant on the handover of the presidency. Senior Melbourne sources said the board would analyse the football department and performance again, look at Shand’s review conducted at the end of last year and examine whether changes recommended then were properly implemented this year. They will consider Alan Richardson’s role as the club’s head of football, the broader coaching panel as well as the senior coaching position, and most pointedly, consider whether changing the senior coach is necessary to prompt cultural and seismic change at the club, or simply the easiest and most symbolic change to make… Melbourne believe they could cover the impact on the soft cap of paying out the final year of Goodwin’s contract, or other contracts, if it came to a decision to part ways… The only certainty, as a senior Melbourne figure said, was that all options were on the table for the football department, with the board agreeing the status quo was not working. The dissatisfaction and resignation of members and sponsors is not lightly dismissed. While all options are on the table for the broad football department and strategy, the same does not apply to the playing list, as players such as Max Gawn and Kysaiah Pickett will not be up for trade… Melbourne refused to trade Oliver to Geelong last year, believing the return offered was insufficient, and shutdown Petracca’s restlessness for a move. The club still believes it would need a significant return to entertain moving any of its players, including that pair, on. The Demons do not have a first round draft pick this year. As a senior Melbourne figure observed of their season, doing nothing is not an option.“

Want to know what Tom Morris thinks? No? Fair enough. But anyway: Tom Morris’ massive trade update on 25 AFL players — SEN “Similarly, significant change is coming at Melbourne on and off the field. “Clayton Oliver’s huge salary works against him now if he wants to leave, which I believe he still does. There’s Bayley Fritsch and even Jake Lever there too. They’re two players to keep an eye on.”

I don’t watch Geelong as closely as us, obviously, but I’ve never thought Danger is a good set shot, or kick in general. If the data backs you up, fair enough, but I still think Trac can be an elite forward if we made a few really important list and coaching changes.

Ralphy (FWIW…) says no interest in Clarry:

Some tidbits here: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/all-our-talk-is-there-and-then-we-don-t-do-it-gawn-delivers-damning-assessment-of-demons-20250728-p5mibh.html “Melbourne’s board has resolved to make whatever changes are necessary to return the club to the top of the ladder after the Demons’ stunning capitulation to St Kilda on Sunday... Football manager Alan Richardson did not attend Monday’s board meeting as he attended the club’s ultimately unsuccessful appeal against the three-game suspension handed to defender Steven May last week. The Demons have been expected to make significant changes to their football department at the end of this season. Goodwin is contracted for next season... As well as Goodwin, the board also heard from Darren Shand, the ex-All Blacks general manager who reviewed at Melbourne at the end of last year and has been consulting the club on culture and leadership since then.“

My current view is that Trac is good enough to help us with our next finals tilt. His age doesn’t bother me, he trains well and if Dangerfield can be an elite forward well into his 30s, Trac can too. Oliver is the one who IMO the club needs to consider moving on. I’m not confident he can get back to his best as he ages, his worst is worse than Trac, he takes a lot of off field effort to manage and keep in line, and he is taking more of the salary cap. So if we are to move on from one, IMO it should be Oliver and not Trac.

And this is not new. This has persisted for years. The best example is the Carlton semi final. Viney, again, panicked in that fateful final play with his hacked kick forward which landed with Weitering. Our leaders are terrible at sensing how to win and knowing what to do. That is a shared failure between themselves and the coaches. The longer it has persisted, the more of a coaching failure it has become.

When was our prior 6-6-6 infringement? We must have already had the warning. And what precisely was the final infringement?

I'd agree, if I felt like this would spark a response from Goodwin, the FD or the senior players. I'm just not at all confident it will.

Since the Sydney win, when we clawed our way back to 5-6, we're 1-7. Scarily, only three of those 8 games have been against top 8 sides (Collingwood, GC and Adelaide). And they would all be in our four best performances in that 8 week period. The other 5 games were the North win, and then losses to St Kilda twice, Port Adelaide and Carlton. Our fixture this year gave us 10 games against the other 7 members of the bottom 8. We are currently 3-6 in those games, with West Coast to come again next week. Even assuming we beat West Coast, we'll finish 4-6 against the bottom 8. Appalling.

Green bristled in those early-season interviews where he was called an interim president. Well, if he disagrees with that title, he can demonstrate it in the next few weeks.