Whispering_Jack

Perhaps Tom McDonald decided to do a Heritier Lumumba and changed his name?

Bob, regrettably over the years I've followed the club we've had some real shockers and Bailey and Neeld are up there with the worst of them. Denis Jones was an absolute stinker in 1978 and Ron Barassi, one of the doyens of modern day coaching had an abysmal year in 1981 - the worst I think I've experienced and that includes this year. Incidentally, I think Neil Craig's half season was as miserable as Neeld's first half which I suppose says something about the playing group and their mindset which I put down as the responsibility of the three coaches we've had in the past three years. I don't get any joy from spending too much time on them but circumstances ...I'm still intrigued about Flack and why he was sacked. Based on what you're saying, it was him who was responsible. FWIW, I think no matter what the reason for his dismissal, if he lagged on the club and his former fellow employees it was a low act for which there is no excuse. It deserves the strongest condemnation, not excuses or apologies.

Interesting stuff from Michael Warner in BackPageLead - Demetriou in the News Limited crosshairs

Thanks for your insights and opinions Bob. It's easy for the naysayers to make glib comments about servants of the club who they dislike and do so without anything that resembles analysis but you do back up your arguments with thought and fact which is more than I can say for some of the tripe we get from some posters in these parts. Clearly, we agree on some things and differ on others and without going into detail (because that would cover ground I've covered before), our main point of difference is that you miss the fact that the list Neeld inherited was not a blank canvas upon which he could set out to work but rather, it was a complete disaster waiting to happen, the culmination of years of poor coaching, recruitment and list development, tainted by the bruise-free allegations, 186, poor leadership and lazy attitudes to training developed over time and a below standard midfield totally unprepared for the changing landscape of the hard press where it was important for players to be able to run both ways and defend strongly. Neeld was responsible for none of which came before him, nor all the calamities that confronted him when he took over. You constantly raise the fact that the team won 8½ games in each of Bailey's final two seasons but omit the fact that by the time Neeld took over, that wasn't going to be repeated without major repair work and a different mindset among the playing group. Many of the team's key performers 2011/12 were already in decline before Neeld came on board. Jamar and dropped form and had fitness issues, Green was on his last legs, Wona was gone, the Flash hobbled, Moloney had already declared he wanted out at the end of 2011 and was useless, Rivers was lost after a monstering by Cloke on an earlier Queens Birthday and Sylvia suffered a bad back injury in the final practice match. Jurrah, the previous year's top goalkicker had been crucial under Bailey but was finished off by that trip home to Alice Springs. That brings me to your revelations about Ian Flack which encompass a part of the Neeld term that has never fully been explored and about which I believe a great deal more will come out in the fullness of time. Some points:- ► I wasn't aware that it was Neeld's decision to sack Flack but if this was the case, then it explains many things to me. I always thought that to be a decision made by the Board or the CEO and not the coach. Do you know why Flack got the flick? ► I also didn't know it was Neeld who let Jurrah go to Alice Springs or in what context a request was made by Jurrah to go there. I had previously been under the impression that Jurrah, who was in rehab at the time, simply left of his own accord without needing permission. After all, it was his home and where his family lived. ► I don't believe Jurrah had previously been required to have supervision when going back home. He had always been painted by others including his biographer as a responsible elder among his community. Did Neeld have reason to suspect that Jurrah was going to head off and get involved in a drunken machete fight? I'm sure you're not suggesting that. ► in any event, I think its a stretch to suggest that Neeld was somehow to blame for the unforeseen loss of a player for the reasons you gave. There might well be underlying reasons for Jurrah to have behaved the way he did, but ultimately he was responsible for his own actions. Then there's Flack's role in the Mufsud/Davey controversy which many consider to be the AFL cover up of 2012. I've heard Mark Robinson allude to this more than once and your revelations are interesting and raise some more questions. ► again you seem to blame the victim by saying that it was "Neeld's decision to escalate the Misfud situation demanding it be investigated". A rookie coach is falsely blamed of being a racist weeks into a new job in which he's working with indigenous players and there's something wrong with demanding it be investigated? That's ridiculous - but no more so than the way the AFL handled the affair so that it had to be stifled and shut out from public scrutiny leaving many threads unsatisfactorily hanging over the heads of the parties involved. ► it was reported at the time that the MFC believed their former employee Flack instigated the affair. Flack denied it but according to a report from Caroline Wilson, Flack did meet Mifsud at about the time this story would have been in germination - - Circle of Trust may claim Mifsud. Wilson knows a lot more about this saga which, because of Flack's involvement in the so-called "Vault" revelations spills into the tanking controversy which also played a major part in destabilising the club and Neeld's term as coach. I think for the sake of history, the whole affair of Flack's involvement in two major controversies that wracked the club must and will ultimately be the subject of close examination. Many of the major players are gone; much of the Board, the CEO, Neeld, Jurrah and Davey are no longer at the club; Grant Thomas left Footy Classified at the end of 2012, Demetriou is on his last legs at the AFL IMO and I don't know about Mifsud but he's not popular with many in the indigenous community. As Michael Long once said: ''If you think black-and-white politics is tough, try black-and-black politics.'' I believe that Neeld was a victim of all of the above and more. That is not to say that he was a saint or a great coach but in the end, his task to improve the team, to harden them physically and mentally was a task which ultimately proved beyond him but in all the circumstances was too monumental to achieve in a short space of time.

The AFL site asked club greats to select the player from their old club who they thought might kick on in 2014. Garry Lyon went for Jimmy T. Great expectations: part two I agree about the upside but while I understand what he's saying about Jimmy being a better player if he was at Hawthorn or Sydney, the comment still makes me feel uncomfortable. I know our performances have been inferior over recent years but if we start thinking that way, it becomes self-fulfilling. With a new year about to begin I think we should be accentuating the positive.

How are the mighty fallen? Graham Swann has retired from all forms of cricket with immediate effect. Kevin Pietersen may follow. West Indies bundled out for 103 against New Zealand. Wow.

Oh, and on the subject of bookies odds, could someone please remind me of Australia's odds of winning the Ashes when the series began exactly one month ago today? (Yes - I do realise the Ashes is a 2 horse race)

I agree with you that an experienced coach would have been an ideal replacement for Bailey, particularly in view of the "bruise-free" allegations, the 186 episode and it's implications but IIRC, uncontracted experienced coaches were pretty thin on the ground. My recollection is that we did make unsuccessful approaches to the managements of Clarkson and Ross Lyon while Collingwood refused to release Malthouse from his contract with them. Perhaps could have gone with Garry Ayres, the last experienced coach left standing but a number of other clubs could have taken him as well and they chose not to do so which suggests he wasn't really considered a viable option at the time. That left us with the untried coaches and given Neeld's role in planning the Collingwood heavy press strategy that won it the flag in 2010, I thought he came across as a highly likely candidate. In the end I think most of us overestimated the quality of the list and none of us could predicted the combination of what was aptly described as "calamities" that the coach and the club faced in his time at the helm. It's easy to say with hindsight that he wasn't up to best standards as a coach but the reality is, as many have pointed out, the list he coached was close to rock bottom standard as well. He might easily have gone on to a successful career elsewhere as Clarkson did at Hawthorn when things fell nicely into place after a similarly rocky start to his career. I also think that together with Dave Misson, he has laid the foundation for lifting the team's physical fitness standards, a project both always said would take three pre seasons. Finally, I'm confident that Roos will prove the bookies wrong because he has assembled a much better list, it will be fitter and with some of those better players on the park more regularly, we will surprise. And yes, Roos is a bloody good coach.

Talking only in general terms and don't know the circumstances of your case but what was done is permitted under the rules in many sports. If the selectors used the rule to do something dodgy, that's another matter altogether.

Paul Roos' job is to instill that particular quality into the right players so that they will be effective in their respective positions. We think of JKH as a crumbing forward because of his size but from what little I saw of him when revisiting the Foxtel vision of the Under 18 championships, I do sense that he could be more than that and while I'm loathe to make comparisons with out and out champions, I'm thinking of Brent Harvey. Of course, that's still a fair way off in the future if it's going to happen at all.

LG - apologies for the scare but I loved the irony of the world's highest paid outside midfielder being the spokesperson for that little piece of GWS propaganda. It reminded me of some of the garbage put out about Melbourne circa three years ago.If there's one thing I want us to do in 2014 it's to smash the living suitcases out of that mob in round three next year (in front of the obligatory 5,000 crowd) with Dom Tyson BOG and be undefeated at the end of the game with a percentage of 150. Am I asking too much?

Bing, the subject might not be front page news elsewhere in the world but I can assure you that in the places that matter, our little pickle with the doping regimes of two clubs in two different football codes is definitely front and centre and if not handled properly, it could adversely affect us in terms of funding and the ability to attract new and major sporting events to this country. If ASADA doesn't get it right and sportsmen get away with ingesting drugs on scales as wide as we've witnessed in both ARL and NRL, our position as a sporting nation will definitely be affected.

When AD eventually does go, this man is his logical replacement. Greater Western Sydney is taking shape, says Tom Scully If that's true from Voldemort (and his form is a bit chequered on that score) I'm not sure if he'll get too much game time when they assemble their best squad .

Legal source told me that "implode" won't be the right choice of word once infraction notices start hitting the fan at Essendon. Try "explode". Lawyers are gearing for a big payday from the situation. Another issue is the AFL sponsors or "partners" as they call themselves these days. Apparently, not all the partners are content to be involved any further with a competition that has issues".

Writing in the Age, sports lawyer, Darren Kane thinks that ASADA has its work cut out for it in proving a case against Essendon players. The problem I have with his entire analysis is that he is examining it in the context of our own legal system while the anti-doping laws are dealt with differently because the AFL (and by extension it's players) gave jurisdiction over this area to another authority when it adopted the WADA Code. The party that determines guilt or otherwise is ASADA on a strict liability basis, the penalty is decided by the AFL and ASADA has the right to appeal a penalty to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

So while we're on the subject of losing people, a very special supporter of the club who I have known since my schooldays was tragically killed in a car accident last week. I didn't know her very well but she was an avid Demon fan and whenever we met the conversation would turn to our footy team. If any of Miriam's family comes across this, please accept my condolences on your very sad loss and the same to all who have lost loved ones this year.

Bob, now I know why you're always so reluctant to respond to my questions. Your conclusion doesn't follow at all because my support of Neeld's dismissal was for other reasons than what you were calling for and Schwab's resignation was necessary in my view also for much different reasons than those you had for wanting him gone (ie. mainly because of the circumstances in which they and the club found themselves). These are both good examples of what I referred to above when I alluded to different interpretations of history. I'm sure you're aware I've been consistent on that point for a long time. Thanks for your kind words about the site and for your contributions to it. Have a joyous Christmas and a happy and healthy 2014 and I look forward to debating our future successes rather than our past failures.

I don't see any point in your questions which don't merit a response other than that which you're getting from me now.My attitude is on the record. Schwab did the right thing by resigning when he did. I was critical of Neeld's coaching during the first part of the season and he was replaced at the right time.

Colin. No problem with being mates. I don't believe we've abused each other in any way as some do around here to those who hold differing opinions to their own. You've raised a number of questions about Schwab but nothing that suggests he was as bad as has been painted or that he was the sole cause of the situation we were in after the first two or three rounds. While I did say the situation was his responsibility as CEO, the main problem was that we had a fixture that was a commercial minefield if the team performed badly and in fact, the team stank. Not all entirely, CS's fault IMO - rather a combination of matters over the years, a situation not helped by the politics that has plagued the club on and off for decades. I know for a fact that the politics had a substantial role in us losing a major sponsor who CS put a lot of time into prior to his departure. I'm not going to repeat the various allegations that were made against him but I often asked the question of those who claimed to know the inner workings and was never given a definitive answer. My conclusion is that he wasn't popular with some people - that's a common thread with many CEO's of big organisations. The biggest furphy that's thrown up is the one about the balance sheet. We know that going to the members for donations doesn't of itself represent a sustainable blueprint for the future strength of the club. It was never intended to be such and this was made clear by all and sundry at the club. It was however, a measure that had to be taken when it was done and I believe it's churlish to deny the credit for the effort made by Jimmy Stynes, Don McLardy, Cameron Schwab or the supporters who made it happen by their generosity. Without it, the club would have been dead in the water by the beginning of the current decade and with it, we were able to secure the support and assistance of the AFL that allowed us to weather the storm we had in 2013. I don't have an issue with you or anyone else thinking the problems were all of the making of Schwab. My view happens to differ. What we do agree upon clearly is that we're both sick of historical whitewashes that blame all the wrong people for our ills.

Thanks for those who have reported on the 2013 pre season training. Work commitments have prevented me from getting down to any of the sessions to date although I did manage to pass a Goschs Paddock session while driving down Punt Road one day. My brief observation which lasted a nanosecond was that they were training the house down. Look forward to more in 2014.

^ much of what you say above is not inconsistent with what I've said even if we don't agree on a few points although you seem to see everything in terms of a black and white blame game. With some of the examples, you cited the position of one person as against another. I heard de la Rue had an issue with the placing of the Hankook symbol. FFS the company got great exposure during its time. On "tanking" you're welcome to that view but it serves to me as an example of the manifestly unjust way in which we were treated. FWIW while I supported the list management, I actually made it clear in what I was writing here at the time, that the practice tested every true supporter's faith in the club. And finally, on Neeld - where did you get the idea that anyone thinks he was blameless for what happened during his tenure?

Nothing wrong with that - it's a legitimate way in which relay teams in many sports (including athletics) are managed.

Not sure what you're trying to get at in the context of the fact that the way we deal with our AFL and NRL doping crises will have an effect on our standing as a sporting nation?

When training resumes on 6 January, 2014 could somebody please take photographs of Pedo so we can decide whether he's ripped with a 6 pack or fat? IMO he disappointed this year and didn't show why the recruiters went ape trying to recruit him, even resorting to giving up a potential champion in Gysberts to get him (sarcasm button on high). However, he did kick what must have been close to our goal of the year during the team's insipid display against GWS so who knows what he might do under Paul Roos.

Am I referring to you? No. I'm referring to those who don't understand how history works, how people are entitled to form views and put their our own interpretation on events and how wrong it is to suggest that a view about which you disagree should necessarily be described as a "bogus version" or how arrogant it is to suggest that those who hold those views are fantasizing. You provide four examples of so called "bogus versions", all of which have been the subject of different interpretations on this board but since there is no absolute truth, who is to say whether they are or are not "bogus" (apart from outright lies, illogical thinking and agenda based propaganda that we do get around here from time to time)? FWIW, here's my interpretation of your four points of so called "bogus history". 1. Daniher - I've never heard it said before that he destroyed the club but I agree he stayed too long. My view is that during the last three years of his tenure the groundwork for the club's later failures was established. I'm not suggesting that Daniher alone was responsible for this but the club's administration of the time was more focussed on keeping afloat and failed to recognise the impending disaster. (I think most supporters, myself included, didn't see it coming either). 2. Schwab wasn't hard done by in the respect that the success of the football club was his responsibility and he had no other option but to resign in the end. He was however, subjected to many allegations over time which were simply untrue and have never been substantiated. When he resigned, the club was facing short term financial issues (due partly to unsatisfactory fixturing and poor team performance) but the balance sheet was far healthier when he left than when he arrived. I think his overall performance compares favourably to his predecessors Ellis, Harris and McNamee but I accept that's not saying much. 3. "Tanking" - most of us supported the form of "list management" that was often publicly endorsed by the AFL CEO and adopted by half of the AFL clubs during the period. If there was to be an investigation on the basis of integrity, I believe the entire issue of tanking/list management should have been investigated meaning every club that was suspected or accused, not just one club. You're right about Wilson and how she bashed the club over what was the word (slanted in my view) of a handful of disgruntled former employees who had axes to grind and who were possibly urged on by those with political motivations against the incumbent board and Schwab. Ultimately, substantial damage was caused to the club in the process. 4. Neeld wasn't a great coach but didn't deserve the vilification and some of the lies to which he was subjected. After starting off well with the Clark recruiting coup and a promising first up NAB Cup win over Collingwood, he suffered a series of disasters which included a vicious personal smear campaign, the loss of some of his better players to injury (and in one instance to criminal charges) and ultimately, he lost the plot and the players, some of who had already been tainted by club politics by the time Neeld arrived and had lost their value as team members. My assessment is that overall he gets a bum wrap from many and I doubt whether his predecessor would have lasted five minutes with the crap he had to endure. I rate his 1½ years as no worse than RDB's first 1½ years in 1981/2. As Carrot Top pointed out above, Neeld did some good things at the club which were necessary after years of neglect and incompetence. Unfortunately for him, the measures he took were unpopular with many in the playing group and led to his downfall. The good news is that I believe Roos understood this when he took on the job and he's astute enough to adopt those aspects of the Neeld style that are important to maintain and rejected those which simply didn't work.