Hazyshadeofgrinter

One of the consequences of having an unpopular opinion is that there are many people to disagree with you. I have no intention of "spamming" the website, but the sheer volume of posts that are aimed directly at me means that if I decide to respond to even half of them, it can seem as though I am spamming the thread. Of course, I don't have to respond to everyone but I feel I have a right of reply so if I feel like responding I'm not too bothered about it. I can see how it might be frustrating for some people to read several posts in a row from one poster, particularly when they strongly disagree with that poster. No doubt this is why people start to go off topic and end up writing posts that do nothing to contribute to the conversation but instead just try to insult me. I know I'm not perfect, but I like to think that most of the time, I give pretty good responses to thoughtful posts, and I tend to not get too bogged down in the stupid insults (hence, "no, you are"). What I think people would find even more frustrating would be if I were to indulge posters who try over and over again to change the subject of a thread to be about me instead of the issue at hand. To some extent I am doing this now, but from time to time I feel the need to point this out. As well as this, I have addressed these sorts of arguments about me several times before and I am a little sick of repeating myself to be honest. These are the reasons I will not be indulging Ben Hur in his irrelevant ad hominem games in this thread. If you don't like it, too bad (hence: "start your own thread"). Now please try and stick to the topic for my sake, and for the sake of everyone else who is sick of this p1ssing match.

You don't think that the events of last year indicated some Hollywoodesque problems at the club? Even when you consider that Garry came out of retirement to play a starring role? Is there something else you want to say to me?

I change my mind in the face of conflicting evidence. I've noticed that I have been doing most of the heavy lifting as far as evidence goes. You just ignore it because it interferes with your preferred reality (I use the term loosely). Who is the real fanatic?

Start your own thread

I don't really want to reply to this directly. I just want there to be an accurate record of your contribution so that you can't go back and edit your posts as you have done on previous occasions.

Timely of you to raise this article. It would seem that Mr. Happell's concerns about the Hollywood culture have been borne out with Schwab's three year contract being the most recent example.

Thank you Am I to assume that you agree with me on the other points that I have made? Also, I noticed that you accused me of being petty (twice) and bitter. You may have something you want to get off your chest but it doesn't do anything for your argument. The off-field department I referred to now includes 41 non-football operations staff. Three of these people have “Chief” in their titles and another 19 have “Manager” in their titles – it would seem that half of them are managing the other half. The total salaries for this area of the club have more than doubled during Schwab's tenure for no appreciable benefit. Not including Schwab himself, we have nine people listed under the Partners & Corporate area on the club's website. I'll admit I have no idea what these people do all day but here is a list of things that they do not spend their time on: Identifying sponsors like Kaspersky Maintaining good relations with sponsors like Hankook ​Conducting due diligence on sponsors like Energy Watch By the way, I have no objection to the continued increase in spending on football operations and I actually give Schwab some credit for this. Of course, I would prefer that this was done on a sustainable basis. Yes, partly. It also overlaps with other pints I made such as the time spent on the logo and blazers and Shwab's poor financial management. Basically, this was a catch all for the fact that Schwab is frittering away the money that supporters have poured into the club with donations that they have not been called upon to make previously and that will not provide income on a sustainable basis. Do you deny that Schwab has been wasteful? No, it is relevant. Schwab and his team should have better things to spend their time on. The logo and blazer also lend support to the rumour that Schwab is more interested in his personal legacy than the good of the club. Do you deny that the club has serious cultural problems and that Schwab has contributed to these? No, it is a valid point. If Schwab was a player I would have delisted him by now. I certainly wouldn't have locked the club into a three year deal. I suspect that even many Schwab supporters would agree that his latest contract is irresponsible given that the Board almost sacked him last year. It smacks of cronyism to me. Is this supposed to be an excuse? You seem to agree that Schwab was part of the problem. No, his mates gave him a mulligan which is why he still works for the club. I hope the Demons do well and I think we would be better off without Cameron.

Here are the points I was able to identify from your post: Unity is the most important thing for the MFC To which I replied: Unity is not always a good thing (e.g. boys club). Accountability is more important. Schwab does not inspire unity but is, in fact, divisive. The appointment is good because Schwab is good with club finances To which I replied: Schwab has had very little to do with any of the financial improvements and those financial areas he has had control of have performed poorly You don't know whether or not Schwab deserves blame or credit for the 186 debacle Which I ignored because I didn't think it deserved a serious response A vague assertion that Schwab is respected by “those high up at AFL and club level” To which I replied: This is not a compelling argument for a three year appointment People who disagree with you should “get over it”and “move on” Which I refuse to do because, unlike Schwab, I am a lifelong Melbourne supporter – not just an employee The only other point I could identify that I did not directly address was that the Board's decision to extend Schwab's contract is itself proof of Schwab's abilities. This is clearly nonsense. The Board's appointment of Schwab could only be considered an endorsement of Schwab's abilities if you could show that: 1. the Board is competent 2. the Board is well informed 3. the Board will always put the interests of the club before the interests of themselves and their mates Each of these points have serious question marks over them which I would be happy to expand on if you would like. In any case, I think I have already given enough reasons to doubt Schwab’s competence. Given that you appear to have conceded my points, this leads me to conclude that at least one of the above assumptions about the Board is incorrect. Please indicate: Which points you have made that I have missed Which of my responses you disagree with and why

no, you are

Actually, what the club really needs are supporters with enough brains to hold the Club's administration to account - because we know that both Schwab and the Board are unable to do this for themselves or each other. The club doesn't need cheerleaders. Time to take the blinkers off.

I read it mate, it's the same bulldust that gets uncritically parroted on this website day in day out by desperate people who live in hope and don't know any better. Here's a radical idea, if I am so far off the mark, why don't you just address the substance of my post? Alternatively, if you're going to be content with glib one-liners then I'll just state that I'm pretty sure that Don McLardy doesn't know his arse from his elbow and leave it at that.

Stating that someone is "by all accounts is well respected by those high up at AFL and club level" is not a compelling argument. Neither is telling people to "get over it" and "move on". You always refer to people who disagree with you on this subject in fanciful ways. Restless ghouls rattling chains, dark acolytes whispering and so on. I'd like to know who exactly you are referring to when you make these kinds of comments because I am simply a flesh and blood supporter who never drank the Kool-Aid. The most desperate need of the Melbourne Football Club is not consistency at the top - it is accountability. Something that has been sorely lacking around the place for the last few years. Ans as for Schwab's financial performance, the three biggest determining factors in our asset turnaround have almost nothing to do with Schwab: 1. Donations (thank the supporters) 2. Bentleigh Club (thank the previous two Boards) 3. Changes to TV rights/stadium deals (dumb luck/thank the AFL) And while I'm at it, don't give me any of that new facilities rubbish either because he didn't have to lift a finger for any of it. The two financial areas that Schwab has had control over are: 1. Sponsorship (has been an absolute train wreck) 2. Operations (has doubled the non-football staff for no benefit, still rattling the tin and hasn't got a sustainable business model despite the points listed above) And then there are the non-financial things like leadership, corporate culture/structuring, corporate relations, media/PR, just to name a few. Schwab gets a fail on every one of these measures. As for the idea that Schwab breeds unity, first of all that is not always a good thing (e.g. boys club), secondly, it is a laughable proposition. Schwab is a poster boy for divisiveness. Cameron's legacy will be as follows: - Bloated off-field department - Unsustainable business model - Waste - Stupid logo - Stupid blazers - Poisonous culture and last but not least - A big pay out that the club can ill afford because he has convinced his mates to give him a three year deal I guess Schwab has finally worked out what you have not - he simply isn't up to it.

New faces on the Board New CEO, Schwab does not ask to be paid out in full Sustainable business model, no more tin rattling Beat two out of Richmond, Carlton, Essendon and Collingwood Less injuries, continued player development

merge thread?

We already have enough threads about Viney Jnr.

I think Jurrah edges him.

GC by 13 points.

I know you're pleased to see me - but am I wrong? How would you rate the club's recent history of media performances?

Why is Todd Viney our General Manager of Player Development and Strategy? How does it make sense to put him in charge of draft selections when the biggest decision to make this year will be if and when to draft his son? It is liking asking a surgeon to operate on his or her own child. We should already have appointed someone else to this role, even on a temporary basis. It is not fair on Todd. It is not fair on Jack. Most importantly, it is not fair on the club.

Regardless of how people think we should handle the media in respect of this specific incident, this is not the first time I have had thoughts along these lines. Other clubs take their media responsibilities seriously. The AFL itself takes media very seriously indeed. We have eight board members and, by my last count, our back of house staff has blown out to more than 40 employees, not including the Football Department. From memory, this would mean that we have roughly doubled our non football staff in the last four years or so. I know that we are spending more than twice the amount on their salaries. Apparently we have a surplus of people who are qualified to design new blazers and football logos, but not a single competent media spokesperson/PR person. Who is accountable? I doubt they even know.

Yes, I was just about to throw in the towel but then Range Rover made a decent post which I felt deserved a thoughtful response. I won't apologise for my continued posting but rest assured that I have had my fill for today.

This is not enough and no cause for confidence. I am concerned that people pay too much attention to the "right noises" and not the reality. "We will be the hardest team to play against" is good noise, do we have any reason to think that we are making worthwhile progress on this front? This is what I am interested in, please explain these measures more fully and why they give you confidence in his abilities. I see this as inconsistent. You appear to think that the only valid opinions at this stage are the ones that you hold. I would contend that all opinions are valid provided that they are based on evidence. I'm really sick of that "hidden agenda" stuff. I read it on hear all the time and I know that you are aware that I am accused of it more than most. Ultimately, it is meaningless and it certainly has no relevance to this discussion. When people start to play the man and not the ball, it is usually because they are losing the contest.

ouch