Lord Nev

Second job possibly to get someone in as a goal kicking coach? (Part time you'd think)

We're a team crying out for goals, skill and outside players and you want to immediately drop a player who gives us all those things? Seems a strange decision to me, and your "he's a laughing stock" comment is completely over the top. Viney is a gutsy player, yet he is doing more damage than good currently and our balance of 'gutsy' players has seen us in deficit for skill.

'See you later' to the highest average goal kicker from a team struggling to score? Not sure that's the first move I would make myself.

Perhaps read the article linked the post mate. It explains a lot of your questions.

Some more clarity from the club here, including that the players were consulted on what changes they thought would work and that it was all due to a review: Melbourne seeks opportunities to improve “We looked at the whole department and said, ‘How can we set up a better structure, how can we set up better programs and processes?’, and that probably took three or four weeks of internal interviews with staff, players and coaches."

Great news. Find it strange that over the last few weeks people were complaining about our assistants, the President, the CEO, the fitness staff, the lack of a 'review', yet here we are with some proactive changes made clearly after Bartlett has conducted internal reviews and people are complaining? Interesting that Misson has seemingly also been demoted (reading between the lines a bit). Congratulations also to Sam Radford who has been promoted to senior coach of Casey.

All fairly made points. That's the gamble with Petracca I suppose. I don't think we'd be looking to trade any of our core players for draft picks though. We've actively avoided the early parts of the draft the last few years as we obviously thought our window was open, I personally think it still is so I wouldn't be trading for picks at this stage. Absolutely agree on Gus' resilience, I love him as a personality, and he's clearly exceptionally talented, I'm more weighing it up on an emotionless needs basis.

Do we need him when Jones retires though? We already have Oliver, Harmes, Viney, Petracca, Sparrow, Dunkley and more to play that inside grunt role. Who do we have as quality outside players? Spargo? Neal-Bullen? Not exactly A grade, and not exactly quick and skillful. I do agree the trade scenario of Gus plus our first pick is overs however. On the free agent scenario, I tend to agree with Paul Roos in that we are going to see free agents traded before their last contract year more and more often as clubs look ahead to weigh up value. I would think GWS would already know if Whitfield plans to stay end of next year and are planning accordingly, so there's no guarantee he will be available as a free agent.

Can see where you're coming from, but I agree with the article in the initial post when it says: "Trading Petracca now would be a classic case of 'selling low'." We just wouldn't get value for him at the moment, so to me his potential is worth more to us than what we would get in return for trading him.

Fair enough mate. Personally I'm not too concerned about votes allocated by umpires, I'm more into having a team that will win a flag. I would have Gawn, Oliver, Jetta and Melksham as my untouchables, even though none were top 3 in the Brownlow.

Yep, and that's why he has good trade value despite an extremely poor 2019. The suggestion isn't we trade him because he's not good enough, the suggestion is we trade him because he has high value and we could use that value to better balance our team and address the needs that see us currently sitting at 16th on the ladder. So, I counter that 'alternate scoreboard', with this one:

Yep, spot on and summed up really well. It's part of what made me waver about the trade scenario, having Oliver, Viney and Harmes still there, possibly along with Petracca after a full preseason, a gun outside mid of the likes of Whitfield could dramatically change us.

I agree to be honest. I'm equal parts fan and critic of Viney, and have been a bit of a broken record about him being rated the worst user inside 50 in the entire comp, but I couldn't see the club trading him.

Appreciate that mate, but the context of Kennett's comments revolved around the staff at Marvel Stadium. Either way, I still maintain your assumption the security industry is 'dominated' by 'young Indians' is at best off the mark. But I'll leave it at that as we're going back and forth over the same ground now. Cheers.

I think the majority of Dees fans recognize we have weaknesses in midfield skill, outside run/pace and delivery forward, as well as us being in our 'window' as of now. I get that there's other areas we may debate with each other about, but I feel those things are pretty clear. So how do we improve those areas quickly enough that we can make the most of our chances now? This article raises a hypothetical that I scoffed at at first but have wavered a bit since thinking about it more. Why trading Angus Brayshaw could fix Melbourne's midfield "But Brayshaw personifies Melbourne's midfield issues - fantastic in the contest, tough as old boots and able to find the pill, but unreliable by foot. He has committed the 11th most turnovers in the league this year, with his disposal efficiency under implied pressure and physical pressure the second-worst and fourth-worst of the league's top 50 ball-winners." It goes on to suggest trade scenarios which would see us losing Gus, and possibly a pick, to return Lachie Whitfield. My questions are these: - Is Gus 'untouchable' given we have Oliver, Harmes & Viney in the same role? Plus, with Sparrow and Dunkley potentially coming through in the same vein, others as depth etc. - What do we make of Gus' massive form slump this year? You could argue it coincides with him attending less centre bounces, but there's other aspects to that as well such as his concussion history, his lack of accountability this year and of course, our lack of outside run which sees him being used there. Is he injured this year? Unhappy? Something seems up with him. - Do we need to make such a big move or do we rely purely on tweaks to game plans, roles and structures in the offseason? I guess that boils down to trust in the footy department to fix things, which I imagine is at a low point given our performance this year. Thoughts?

No, you're the one who brought up the ethnic background and Visa conditions of the security at Marvel Stadium and then stated 'young Indians' are 'dominating' the security industry. Now you're moving the goal posts to the MCG, 7/11 stores and crowd behaviour. So once again I ask, what are you basing your assumption on?

You're still missing the point. What is your basis for assuming the security industry is 'dominated' by 'young Indians'? I've worked closely with that industry for 24 years and that's not been my experience at all.

One swallow doesn't make a summer.

Interesting to see the reaction of the usually uninvolved Cyril to Jeff's comments. I'm assuming the quality of his comments wouldn't have come as a surprise to Cyril given his rocky history with his former President.

Ok then I'll rephrase if you prefer: What is the basis of your 'suspicion' that AIG Security are employing Indian students to work at Marvel Stadium?

Not that "a poster" isn't always the best source of information, but as far as I know the security contract for Marvel Stadium is AIG Security who are based in Fairfield, VIC. What exactly are you basing your assertion on that all the security staff are 'Indian students'?

No he didn't. He assumed as such by making generalisations about the appearance of the few security people he's seen, and was caught out doing so. To quote: Neil Mitchell: What, you mean they appear to be of ethnic background? Mr Kennett: Well, they’re new arrivals to Australia, it appears. Neil Mitchell: We don’t know that. Mr Kennett: We don’t know that and they could be born here. But of course, I wouldn't have thought you would know the facts given your disdain for the media. I wonder how you even heard about it?

Probably need a sample size bigger than 1 game before judging it myself, but you're entitled to your opinion.

Apologies, was not meant to come across as a dig at you in the slightest, and didn't mean it to imply you were being selective or anything of the like. Was merely trying to add to your post with a quote from the interview which I personally found appalling.

For full clarity though, let's remember the full trade scenario ended up being: OUT: Hogan, Pick 65 (which they didn't use) IN: May, Kolodjashnij, Sparrow