Redleg

It’s clearly a loss of confidence. A player doesn’t just lose his talent.

A CEO is basically the business manager and he has to be good at running the business. We have seen “fan boys” and “wanna be coaches” before and a good footy CEO doesn’t necessarily have to be an ex jock and if you have a good FD boss, who can run the FD well and report to the CEO, that may be a better result. Think Cameron Schwab and the whiteboard.

2nd and 3rd year blues respectively. They will get back to their best and we know they can play.

How did he present when you interviewed him?

And if he was a fantastic appointment, would you wait a few months, or rather lose him and appoint a lesser person who could start right away?

Bit of angst on DL these days.

.

At least we can all be happy we won’t be losing again this weekend.

I posted that several players have poor second seasons and that Caleb could be another and Kolt could be another too. Very confident about Caleb being a very good player and hopeful that Kolt will be one too.

Samoans speak Samoan and Finns speak Finnish. Neither language is English. What therefore is the reason the AFL are denying us access to a player we have invested some time in, given that they are going to change the rule next year? The Northern teams are being very well looked after and we have already been dudded by this system with Mac Andrew. If we have any interest in Ah Mu and he has a younger brother who has some ability apparently, I would be screaming AFL house down.

A lot of players suffer 2nd year let downs and Caleb might be another.

Agree 100%.

I believe it will happen and am actually happy about the pivot on the site, as I wrote before and have always believed, it is a far better site, giving us a bigger area, with better access, on a corner position, not hemmed in, in an internal sliver of land. It borders the track, with easy access to the inner area, where ovals etc would be situated. It also allows any buildings to be built further from the racecourse grandstand and more out of view from them, obviously on the other side of the track and of course, not interfering with the view of the racetrack. It also allows avoiding shadowing, as it would be on the south side of the racecourse. I don’t think money will be the issue, as we have a decent percentage already committed and the AFL owes us and there will be some Government contribution at some stage, as Caulfield is still an area a Government would want to have, both State and Federally and there is going to be community benefit as part of the project.

He seems to be publicly against it, but he is not the person or part of the authorities in charge of the precinct.

No, we do.

From the Horse’s mouth, excuse the pun, I can assure you Scopus are 100% behind the MFC being there with them. They see it as exciting and beneficial to all parties.

I still don’t understand how a Finnish mother gets her son into NGA, but a Pacific Islander mum doesn’t. It’s made worse as the Finn married a former AFL footballer and the boy who is with the Saints Academy, is suddenly Geelong’s player.

So he went broke because years before he donated money to the Demons. Are you being facetious?

$2.7 million in fact.

I think that’s why McVee got off so there wouldn’t be any publicity. Same as Hardwick getting off Kozzie trip. Orders from up high maybe?

No surprise, not even a fine, not even the slightest mention. Kozzy would have got a minimum of 3 weeks for that.

I did not know of this new development in the project, but from my knowledge of the area, this is clearly a bigger site and better situated. The Freedmans walked horses onto the track, directly at the rear of the stables, which would clearly allow direct access to the ovals by players, that would not appear to require any change to the mooted plans for the ovals and inner track development.

The new area will be better and is the old Freedman stables with better access to streets and more space in a self contained allotment. Closer to trains as well.

I have already done that Layzie. However, we lost against Port and I am not blaming umpiring.

It’s the goals from frees and 50m penalties that is the important stat and the last two games it is something like 12 to 2 against us, though some of them were simply our dumb play. How many times in the last two games did you hear the commentators say “that was a soft goal from a free to the opposition and Dees were unlucky near goal not to get a free”. Rarely hear “that was a soft free kick goal to the Dees.” But we know the reason we are losing and it is poor skill in ball use, poor inside F50 entry and atrocious kicking for goal.