Whispering_Jack

Beautiful stuff from Greg Baum in the Age - AFL A NUMBERS GAME

Dandenong Stingrays 3.1.19 5.3.33 8.9.57 11.12.78 Oakleigh Chargers 3.2.20 6.6.42 9.8.62 13.9.87 Goals Dandenong Stingrays O'Hanlon 2 Wright Wallace Calvert Salopek Benbow Whitfield Minchington Pongracic Elton Oakleigh Chargers Soriano 3 Gotch 3 Mascitti 2 Williams Pearce Greene Viney Murphy Best Dandenong Stingrays Kelly Minchington Haynes Benbow Whitfield Hill Oakleigh Chargers Tyson Tomlinson Gotch Jong Mascitti Pearce

It looks like Neeld is indeed a done deal but there are some differences between the way the HUN and the Age see things will go regarding whether Neeld will have a senior assistant and whether that person will be Neil Craig. Sheahan thinks Craig is likely to be appointed to work with Neeld while John Pierik and Caro at the Age say it's understood that "Neil Craig and Rodney Eade have been ruled out". Garry Lyon writes for the Age and on that basis alone, I suspect that Craig might be out of the picture.

SCULLY CONTINUES TO DENY GWS MOVE At the Greater Western Sydney press-conference held yesterday to announce his signing, new recruit Tom Scully continued to deny that he had a made a final decision about his playing future. “No, I haven’t signed – I’m just up here to have a look” declared Scully as he posed for a promotional photo in his new kit with coach Kevin Sheedy. ... read on (from the very funny White Maggot)

If there is a set time (2:10 on 17/10/11) for announcement of the outcome of the GWS zone incentive process then the way it is done is that bids are lodged with GWS during the trade period and GWS makes its decision at the end of the period to be announced at that time. That sounds like a tender to me irrespective of what they call it.

Well before the above timeline started and a couple of weeks before Bailey made his exit from the club, a certain betting agency had Neeld down as favourite for the MFC coaching job. Make of that what you will.

I wonder why the GWS zone incentive selections are determined at the end of the trade period and not at the beginning? Surely that means that if a club wants to trade a player or player as part of the tender to GWS and the club misses out, the player cannot then be traded to anyone else? Or am I missing something?

No typo there Kent80. I was quoting Mark Robinson on AFL360 from Wednesday evening. Sad to say, concepts such as integrity, loyalty and honesty which were once so important when our game was a sport have been swept under the carpet by some of the shonks who run the game now that it's become so commercialised. I'm not suggesting that the game was in a totally pristine state when I first became a fan but the old time heroes had such a wholesomeness about them and you don't see those qualities as much these days. I'm not blaming the people involved because the sport's become a business. Just being nostalgic.

Grant Thomas is saying that the St. Kilda board bungled the negotiations with Lyon and, as a result, lost him but my mail is that Lyon has wanted out for some time. It must have been a frustration coaching at a club that, it is said, stuffed up on Ben Cousins and then Luke Ball, went through the embarrassment of Andrew Lovett, the continued fall out from the Montagna/Milne saga, dikileaks and the final straw of player misconduct on the pre season trip to New Zealand. For a professional coach to get his side to three grand finals and genuine contention to win two premierships was an outstanding feat. To make it all the way to the finals this year with a team so lacking in depth was also a fantastic achievement. He will definitely shake things up over in the west although the fact that he has achieved at St. Kilda does not necessarily translate into success with the Dockers. Things are evolving so quickly in the game that I wonder if he will be able to adapt his coaching techniques to a new environment and a new era. It just goes to show how tough the football environment has become.

As a big admirer of James McDonald I have mixed feelings about this. I'm a self-confessed traditionalist and like the concept of a one club footballer and the thought of him wearing those colours rankles. In addition, I thought he was past his prime at the end of 2010 so I wouldn't really be expecting much if he did play at GWS next year. On the other hand, if that's what he wants to do, then I wish him good luck.

I think the "outsider" aspect is important because he (and/or other outsiders) would come in without any involvement in the train wreck that epitomised the club in 2011. This would place him in a better position to deal with the issues that led to the dramatic inconsistencies in performance in the first two thirds of the season and the insipid and uninspired way we finished off the season. I don't blame Todd Viney for this - as coach of a team that was badly wounded, lacking in confidence and some key on field personel, he was on a hiding to nothing as coach. He'll be around to help in his capacity as development coach and I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with Todd coaching his own son. So yes, in my view there is a difference and it's one of great significance if we're to extricate ourselves from what was a dire situation by the end of the year. I have no idea whether the rumour is soundly based but this sort of combination definitely appeals to me.

Burns - tough, honest, well respected and played under Malthouse. Craig - has the experience, innovative and a sports science background. Two outsiders with no relationship to the old guard at the club who presided over the past few disastrous months - the perfect fit to come in with new assistants and clean house.

How far round his head did Garry Lyon roll his eyes when Barrett said that?

Just off twitter this one is supposedly from Grant Thomas* (and remember that he works with Garry Lyon on Footy Classified) - (* I say supposedly because apparently there are a few people around who fake other people's names on twitter accounts.) I quite like the idea. The other two Scotts coaching in the AFL have been very impressive.

I can't believe it. Redleg's horse has it's own website - Man of Magic I'll bet the $6m man doesn't have his own website yet!

Fair go. We didn't speak with him and R Lyon to Freo was apparently a done deal five weeks ago.

"Man of Integrity" WOW!

The people at St. Kilda must feel crushed at the moment.

Of course he is the six million dollar man so it's likely that Sheedy will ensure that he gets a bionic knee.

Every single poker hand is different and no single hand is dependent upon another. That said, if Doc Larkins information on Tom's knee is correct, it raises some additional questions about the way in which the two clubs in question operate and why both of them were throwing substantial contracts in his direction. In Melbourne's case, one would imagine that the club closely monitored the situation throughout the season and would have been fully aware of his condition. Yet, it reportedly offered him a $3m contract over 5 years. We're informed that at least the club never wavered from that figure while GWS kept upping the ante to the eventual $6m over 6 years. Given that Tom Scully was a Melbourne player throughout the 2011 season and publicly stated on many occasions that he wanted to concentrate on his comitments to the club during the year and would not consider any offers until the season was over, it would be interesting to know exactly when the GWS medical people carried out their due diligence on him. Surely they didn't leave it until last Sunday when Tom and his family flew up to Sydney? Tom and his father told Hutchy and the 9 news crew that they were having a look around. Tom told him he clearly hadn't made up his mind yet, so a busy day awaited them. They wouldn't have cleared the airport until late morning. Then there would have been the introductions to Kevin Sheedy, Choko and the GWS admin people, lunch, an inspection of the magnificent Skoda Stadium, the facilities at the Resort at Breakfast Point, time to consider the contract he was being offered and to discuss whether to accept, the acceptance, a cup of tea with Sheeds to celebrate the decision a bit of rehearsal for the promo that was filmed that day, the filming and by the time that was finished, the sun would have been well over the yardarm. So when did GWS carry out the medical examination and, if Larkins is right, why would GWS commit so much of the AFL's money to someone who is unlikely to play 120 games over the span of that 6 year contract? It would take a bunch of complete and utter fools to commit so much money to the sort of risk Larkins is suggesting Scully's recruiting poses. Surely, the Doc must be wrong on this one?

VFL: Casey Scorpions out in straight sets

According to Patrick Keane on Twitter:- Melbourne will receive First Band Compensation - a First Round selection and a Mid-First Round selection for Tom Scully. Grounds for appeal?

Thanks Felix and Don. It took me a while but I finally found the Jak Niall article from June and my comments from that time haven't changed one bit. If we get what's being discussed in the media then we're being shafted. That is - if what Jake Niall said in the article is correct i.e. "... In addition, the expert panel of AFL talent identification manager Kevin Sheehan and game analysis manager Andrew McKay has the power to override the formula and change the outcome if there is what the AFL called 'an anomalous result'" -DEES COULD GET ABLETTLIKE COMPO FOR SCULLY On that basis, Melbourne would have a reasonable argument on commercial terms that, given Scully's age, his performances to date, his potential, his remuneration, the club's investment made over two years and the substantial goodwill (in the business and personal sense), an anomalous result would occur if the compensation consisted of anything less than a priority first selection (at any draft including 2011) plus another first round selection. Anything less and, in my view, the compensation would be insufficient. This would be based on the fact that Scully was a priority selection in the first place and there has been substantial input into him over the two years since his selection. A commercial court or tribunal would, I believe, be receptive of such an argument. The AFL should do so as well. Cameron Schwab is a smart operator. If the rule as expressed by Niall is correct then Schwab knows this and that he would be able to put a strong argument for compensation along the lines I set out above if it ever becomes necessary. My other concern has been with the AFL's obvious conflict of interest. It is committed to ensuring that a strong GWS will emerge virtually from inception to ensure that blowout results don't mar its early seasons. It also has a responsibility to its existing clubs and must ensure that those that are raided are adequately compensated. It's hardly appropriate therefore that the AFL should have any input in deciding whether an "anomalous" situation would exist on the question of any compensation for Scully. Instead, I believe the AFL might have told the club already exactly what compensation it would get - notwithstanding that Scully was supposedly wavering at the time as to whether to go to GWS. If that is truly the case then its problematic because, how could the AFL make a determination on compensation when one of the major criteria was unknown i.e. the amount of $'s in the Scully contract? The plot thickens.

Thanks Rhino and that's a good point to end this thread on. All sorts of records were created here but unfortunately for all the wrong reasons. We're contemplating a competition for best of Scully posts for a laugh later on ... in the meantime, it's adios amigos for the Tom Scully saga

Date no good for me. I'm wondering if GWS has a fan forum team yet? If they have I might come out of retirement for one last game so that I can channel some of my latent aggression on an unwitting orange clad cretin.