Its Time Again

If you want to go around claiming you are quoting what was said then please get it right. Here is actually what he said. "My Manager said Melbourne are keen and I think we can get you home and we can keep it quiet. “I guess throughout the year there was a bit of unrest at Melbourne it seemed,” Houston told SEN’s The Run Home. “I let my manager know that it probably wasn’t the best thing for me – I’d probably rather not go there and that sort of opened everything right up and that’s when it opened things up for everyone else and I had to go through the whole process again.” What are you talking about when you say I recommend another listen. It's clear from this quote that he was on to go to Melbourne when his Manager said it but then throughout the year there was a bit of unrest and then he told his Manager it wasn't the best thing for him and that's when it opened things up for everyone else and he says I had to go through the whole process again.

Come on. Seriously. We won trade week by a country mile. The rest aren't even in the competition. At the start of trade week we'd lost three of our best players and one of our best leaders. By the end we'd recruited Petracca, Oliver, Pickett, got a replacement/upgrade for ANB who can run faster, longer and isn't a turnover king 😎, got break glass in an emergency ruck back up for Maxxy, saved ourselves from giving up this year and next year's first rounders for a half back flanker who went elsewhere for half the price, traded up to get pick 9 so by the end of the draft we'll have the next Petracca and Oliver. What's wrong with these amateurs. They have absolutely no idea. Trade week table. 1. Melbourne . . . . . 2. who cares 3. who cares

I take it that's a reference to Maynard and Moore.

Rule 15.8 (c) Rookie Pre-selection If a Qualified NGA Player is eligible to be selected in the National Draft Selection Meeting and is not selected, the relevant Club may include the Player on its Rookie List prior to the Rookie Draft Selection Meeting by lodging Form 34A by the date required by the AFL. It looks like you don't have to have that written agreement before the draft that if not selected they have to agree to be picked as a Rookie. Looks like that can be decided at the end of the draft. Although the rule requires the form to be lodged by a date required by the AFL so that could be earlier than the draft. Who knows.

Correct subject to Rule 8.8 (b) below. Rule 8.8 Father/Son Rookie Pre-Selection (a) Subject to Rule 8.8(b), where an eligible Father/Son Player has been nominated in accordance with Rule 8.4(b) and is not selected at a National Draft or PreSeason Draft Selection Meeting, the Club with whom he is eligible as a 54 Father/Son Player may include him on its Rookie List prior to the Rookie Draft Selection Meeting in accordance with Rule 10.4. (b) Prior to the inclusion of a Player on its Rookie List under Rule 8.8(a), the Club must provide to the AFL written evidence of the Club’s and Player’s agreement to be listed as a Rookie. That agreement must specify that the Player can and will only be listed on the Club’s Rookie List if he is not selected by any Club at the National or Pre-Season Draft Selection Meeting.

I assume one or two rookies will be moved on to the main list so probably room for two rookies plus Mentha will be a Cat B rookie so won't effect this decision.

Well evidently the answer is going to be a wait and see for the Rookie Draft.

Haven't heard a word about him for quite a while. Anyone know anything. Given we've only got picks 5 & 9 I assume if we are going to get him it will be in the rookie draft and if someone goes for him before that we can't do anything about it without going into debit in next year's draft.

Yeh let’s just stick to the one true religion practiced here and on it’s one sanctified ground.

Yeh correct. I should have said MCG. But they are housed there courtesy of the MCC who manage the MCG.

To be fair when the kid was born he’s talking about it was Israel and occupied by the indigenous population who I assume you are calling nowadays occupiers. Perhaps a discussion for a very different forum. There are plenty available elsewhere.

What do you have in mind when you say "..we could be valuing the MCC relationship more than we do." As an MCC/MFC member I get virtually nothing of value for my Premium membership. I assume that's not what you're talking about but it is a bit of an issue. Basically MCC members taking out the duel MFC membership are doing it as a donation. It's a bit of a long term as to expect this to keep happening without providing anything of meaningful value back. I assume you mean something about utilising or recognising the MCC connection more directly. Interested on your thoughts.

Oh no. He doesn't kick that badly does he.

What say what. Don’t tell me you’re complimenting the Tim Lamb that there’s 8 pages on here discussing sacking because he’s no good. The same Tim Lamb that did a similar trade last year to move up picks and get Tholstrup.

Yep for one season then the next two our midfield and clearance work dropped off a cliff. Evidently he couldn't develop and adapt

This is a great question. Think about some of the Premiership assistants we have brought in. The 2010 Collingwood Premiership midfield raved about their midfield strategy coach, especially Pendlebury. That of course was Neeld. Then we all, especially me, dreamed of getting the Hawks three peat midfield coach, Yze and by the end that didn't solve our midfield issues, now we've got the Tiger three peat midfield coach who the jury appears to be a bit out on after this season after our ball movement and i50 delivery are as bad or worse than ever.

It's an interesting question. I have read that they provide $1mill a year to MFC as an MCC sports section. As we know the MFC Admin is housed in the MCC I'm guessing at heavily subsidised rent. The MFC also have access to some corporate boxes. No idea what that deal is. I have no idea why the MCC do all of this. Surely not just because the MFC is called a sporting section of the MCC but maybe. Does anyone have any idea.

And of course the list manager at the head of the list of sackings

We'll have to agree to disagree on Jordan for the reasons I previously stated. Still got nothing to do with the list manager. But go ahead and continue to call for his sacking. The Grundy failure was down to one person and that wasn't the recruiters or list managers or Grundy. It was by his own admission Gawn who failed miserably to maintain his form as a forward from the previous two seasons. But again its a forum feel free to spout venom and call for sackings of the people who weren't responsible. There's an epidemic of that going on around here at the moment,

Oh come on this is starting to get ridiculous. Now it's the List Manager's fault who gets picked to play. JJ wasn't good enough to be in the top 22 or 23 last season.He went off badly. Lost his pace, decision making and skill also went right off. There were many players ahead of him. Having said that they didn't want him to leave and tried to get him to stay. He left because he wanted better opportunities. The penny dropped after failing at one club and he worked his [censored] off over the summer and came back physically transformed. Swans had an opening for his role. He's had a wonderful season. Who could have predicted that Sparrow would be so terrible this season. So blame it on the list manager. Seriously. As for Grundy. You can't be serious. We all know why he left. But yeh blame it on the list manager. We got the picks we got because Swans took over $700+K off our salary cap. We got an average pick 48 last year but we also got their 2nd round pick this year.

Did he though. Below average in every stat. Only 5 hitouts average per game.

I see I finally convince you it's about recruiters finding players not List Managers . That profile name certainly matches your posts. Well picked.

You're right but name the ruckman who was available and wanted to come to MFC that they missed. They tried several but which ones would come to us after the Grundy debacle

I asked a pretty simple question. Name players who could or would come to us not ones that wouldn't. And in the context of you giving examples that justify wanting to sack the list manager. You haven't done that. Henry wanted to go and play with his brother and live around Geelong, Bowes was a unique situation where they could absorb an absolutely ridiculous overpayment for an average player, Stengle we would never have taken on because of his off field issues and having been sacked by two teams (People like you would have been screaming for the List Manager to be sacked if we'd done that), Bruhn wanted to go live on the surf coast and wasn't what we needed at the time same with Humphries. Mannagh is a brilliant pick up. So sack the list manager because another team plucked one player out of the VFL. We went hard for Meek but he didn't want to be playing at Casey behind Gawn, Ginnivan was a life long Hawks supporter and was desperate to go there, Amon was on a huge contract they could absorb as they had heaps of salary cap as a young team, D'Ambrosio has been a revelation, probably his best season of his career. I wouldn't have taken him on expose form before that. But yeh go ahead and sack the List Manager for that one. We're having a discussion about why you want to sack the list manager. Thank Goodness you're not running the club we wouldn't have anyone there. They'd all be sacked even though other people have the role. They're not excuses they are explanations of why they got best available players for specific roles that had to be filled. I'm not denying the trading since Langdon has been a massive failure except for Hunter who was fine last year and we have to wait and see on McAdam once he's fully fit with a pre season under his belt Fullarton has obviously been a bust. I'll wear your shame of not blaming the List Manager and demanding he be sacked for recruiters not finding better players. I don't know how it works but Jason Taylor obviously has an unbelievable touch for drafting, I don't know if he or others are responsible for trading. I think Kelly O'Donell is supposed to scout other teams or maybe that is for game day. If there is someone responsible for trading then they should be looked at being moved on. Unless it's Jason Taylor in which case they need help on the trading side

Yep. Absolutely clueless. Again just to clarify, Lamb is the List Manager, not the recruiter. Do you think he sits around all day at football grounds watching players. No, that's the recruiters job. He identifies with the FD and the recruiters what holes there are in the "list"and then it's the recruiters job to go and find them. It's not his fault if we don't have the salary cap space they are demanding, it's not his fault if they want to live on the Surf Coast, it's not his fault if their Club is demanding too much for a trade. Of course it's undeniable that our trading since Langdon has been a bust. Except Hunter who was ok last year and injured this year. Every player we have recruited in that time has filled in exactly the holes that have been identified. Obviously there haven't been key forwards out there. You have to turn over at least 6 list places a season. So what do you do experts suggest? Not recruit anyone because there's no one good enough or get someone in who can fill the role and get the FD's advice on whether they think they can work wth them to get the job done. It's so easy to run around on keyboards demanding people get sacked when they are probably excellent at what they do and some things aren't their fault. Graham Wright might have done a lot worse job. Who knows. As for your individual examples. McAdam was exactly what we needed and has shown he is extremely talented and plays small and tall. He was injured the entire pre season and over half of the season. It's way too early to make a judgment on recruiting him. Fullarton evidently has been a massive fail. But again he plays exactly the role we needed which was Lamb's job. It was the recruiters who found him and the FD who thought they could work with him. Billings had 3 brilliant seasons at the Saints and has been injured every season since. He was theoretically exactly what we needed a skilled deliverer i50. There was an expectation by many that he would be back to his best which is very good and just what we needed. It didn't work out that way. I wouldn't be sacking Lamb over these. Your point 2 is a bit ridiculous. Did we have enough depth when Brayshaw went down. If we knew Brayshaw was going down the list management would have been different. Plus Sparrow has IMO been the most disappointing player on the team this season. He was expected to step up into a full time midfield/onball role and went badly backwards. Your point 3. You don't seem to know your own team. Sparrow has spent a lot of time playing half forward not mifdield. .He was meant to step up this season on ball but was a bust a lot of the time . Tell me an instinctive key forward out there we've missed out on that wanted to come to the club. We tried to get Meek but no decent ruck is going to want to come to MFC and play at Casey. It wasn't for lack of trying. I spoke to Goody about Laurie and he is very confident he is going to make it as a good player. Don't think you should sack Lamb over that one either.