iv'a worn smith

Great game Jack Grimes and a future captain. Loved Liam Jurrah's grit too. What I hated most though was the fact, when Jimma is facing his greatest crisis, we could only attract just over 23K to the 'G. I was in the AFL members, and was gladdened by opposition supporters, who came with their colours on to support Jimmy. It seems, the best we can do as MFC supporters, is to ramp up the stereotype..........that is........we are soft. If we can't do it for Jimmy, then who can we do it for? I am totally disgusted.

A great read. By Sam Stynes Go Dees - Do it for Jimmy

Perhaps it is even disrespectful to be even talking about a "replacement" when the press conference has not even been held yet. Let's just wait to hear what Jimmy and the Board have to say first. All any of us should be thinking about at the moment, is the man himself, not replacements.

Sometimes we have fierce debates on this forum. We sometimes even bag each other, but when thinking of Jimmy, lets stick fat and turn out to the game on the weekend. Thinking of you Jim. Get well soon mate. "An Irish Blessing" May the road rise up to meet you May the wind be always at your back May the sun shine warm upon your face And rains fall softly upon your fields And until we meet again May the good Lord hold you in the Hollow of His hand

Michael Voss says at his press conference. "no disrespect to our opponents, but that was not one of best performances tonight" Seriously!!!!??? Anyone who follows Melbourne and can take any positives out of tonight are living cloud cuckoo land. Rhino Richards (cliche, cliche, cliche). You are kidding yourself. No more excuses. Sure, our list is not great, but it is better than what it has displayed over the last 3 rounds. Perhaps Gerard Healy might have been right in his Herald Hun article and don't believe for one minute G lyon would not have known Healy was going to write it. We have to turn this around, because no matter how talented the "kids" we have or are going to get, if this keeps up we will destroy their confidence. Simply not acceptable on any level or by any measure.

Not at all RPFC. I simply mean I don't see a "game plan" at present. Accepting the points you make about the "style", I don't see a game plan that fits that criteria.

1.Cliche!!!!!! Simply being dismissive. 2.Mate, I have been a member of this club for 39 years. I was there in '64. Believe me, I have taken plenty of "time to understand the issues". 3.Sorry RR, your holier than thou stance is the biggest cliche of all. 4.I stand by my original points. Our situation is not unique and your position only seeks to provide further excuses for failure.

And can someone tell me what "style" that may be.

RR, let's make you coach, footy manager and Prez. You know everything and won't tolerate a dissenting point of view. I will always follow the Dees, but unlike you, I will not tolerate mediocrity and hide behind feeble excuses. Seems the bulk of the football world are mis-guided according to you. The heat will come on a lot more as we wearily approach the end of the season. This is a bloody forum and I am entitled to my opinion, as you are entitled to disagree with it, but your condescending stand point is not edifying for anybody. Despite all your excuses, my main point is that the situation the MFC currently finds itself in, is not unique and we all should stop trying to make it so.

In terms of your points about Clarkson, that is precisely what I was saying. He was for the heave ho, but for whatever reason, stayed on, took the bit between the teeth, was passionate about the job and instilled it into his playing list. In terms of Carlton, you are talking about "off field" stuff. I am talking about the "Navy Blue" player spirit. In my mind, despite the odd billionaire, the Carlton faithful, which are legion, would have rallied in any event. Your "editorial" on a man's character is mis-placed in the context I am speaking about. What year was it again? Carlton were woeful and there was talk of us being a top 4 side. Carlton beat us twice that year. With all the off field crap, the Carlton players, even with the obvious list deficiencies played for the jumper. Once again, it seems I have to repeat myself. I am under no illusion as to what is required to make the Dees successful on the field. But that acknowledgement does not diminish the gross lack of on field spirit we currently display. Read my previous post on Cam Bruce's radio interview on the weekend. No more excuses.

We lack a far more important things than those. You can't see it, you can't touch it and you can't smell it, but it is just as important as top draft picks. It's called spirit ---------- team spirit. Are we the only bloody young side in the league that has had major playing list deficiencies in the last 5 years? Despite the beltings that Hawthorn and Carlton were copping, it was clear that the fabric of the clubs remained strong. Clarkson for instance was ready for the heave ho in some peoples' eyes, but he was passionate and the supporters could see the passion. Where's our passion?

If that is indeed the case, it is a sad day for the MFC. Bailey would deny the assertion.

Cam Bruce was interviewed on Radio on the weekend. To me he made two startling statements, in response to questions about the team's performance on Friday night. Firstly, he was asked about the apparent 3rd quarter fade outs. Admittedly, I am am paraphrasing him, but the gist of his answer was like this. We just don't seem to come out after the main break with focus and the right level of intensity To which I ask, why is that so?' The second issue focussed on the turnovers from Melbourne kick-outs. Cam said we don't provide moving targets and therefore don't break up the opposition zone. Fletcher was then able to set up the "wall" and we just couldn't get through . To which I ask, why is that so? CB is a senior player (albeit on the decline), but he has some mates around him who are also senior and should bloody well know better. Accept for Greeny's gutsy effort (yet again) running back with the flight of the ball, I saw nothing like it from the other "senior" players. Why? Once again, I accept we are re-building, I accept we have a lot of inexperience with the new guys, but to me, there is no excuse, for any footy club, to not have a red hot go, when the game is on the line We are better than what we are showing and I'm sick of being the laughing stock. Things will not get better before the year is out, unless something changes, within.

Robert Shaw, on SEN, selected CS in the forward pocket, for his half year "A" team. Of course, no other DEES player was selected.

We're certainly "mediocre", but I don't believe we're as bad as our recent on field performances suggest. And please don't tell me we've been more "competitive". There is an intangible on the field and sometimes you can almost smell it and touch it. I've not seen that at all.

Why is it that when you question the commitment of the playing group, which surely any coach worth his salt should engender, you are summarily dismissed as being "anti". Surely we have a right, on this forum, to ask the question?

I'm am not suggesting this has occurred just because of Bailey, I am simply asking the question are the players playing for him? It's OK if you want to continue to accept on field mediocrity in the hope top draft picks will fix the problem. I would at least like to seem some real grunt in the team and I just don't.

The guys you refer to were coming of a very low base of team performance. Again, is this current group playing for the coach?

I only ask a question, so before the conspiracy theorists get hot under the collar and accepting we have kids, a lot of holes on our list and under performing more senior players, can we honestly say the current group are playing for the current coach? As inexpert as I am, it does not look like it to me.

I think over the last 20 years, our record is far more admirable than St. Kilda. However, we have had a tendency to have an itchy finger, close to the very same button and that is precisely the point. It is time to stop. NO MORE. I would seem that some believe Mike Sheahan only wrote the article simply to fill column centimetres. But perhaps there was just some "method" in his "madness". Apologies for yet another cliche.

Let's compare apples with apples shall we? Tim Watson was a great footballer, but did not hold the same command of respect of his peers, as does Buckley. Perhaps that is why he does so much better as a "clown" on the media now. See his performance on the Channel 7 footy show last Sunday as an example. Also, St.Kilda footy club? Say no more. A history of having its finger on the self-destruct button for more than a generation. All I say is this, if all you want to do is be "patient" and you think draft picks are going to fix our problems, then I am afraid we may very well be looking at a grim future indeed, especially in what will become an even more competitive business. Mediocrity should no longer be tolerated.

I base my opinion on a number of aspects. 1. Buckley has a passion and wants to coach. He has put his hand up for 2010. 2. He has always commanded respect among his peers and younger guys. 3. He has obvious footy smarts. 4. (And perhaps the most important) the kudos, marketing currency, a general exposure he would bring to the MFC would be priceless. Finally, I will say it one last time. Yes, we are in a re-building phase, yes, I do want high draft picks, but I do not see those 2 factors as being the panacea for our club. I am not prepared to accept that things will just happen because we have had the better end of the draft for the last 3 years. I want to see some resolve and steel back in the footy club, which I personally have not seen since G Lyon was there. That's all. If Buckley is available and we're a chance to get him, I say why not go for it.

Hi AF, There is a thing called "opportunity cost". In other words, what is the potential opportunity "revenue" we may lose, if we don't have a sniff at Buckley. OK, we have, for the first time, in excess of 30K members. Given the draft picks we had and smart marketing from J Stynes and Schwabby, that's great, but no guarantee it will be replicated next year, especially if we get belted; time and time again in the second half of this year, as I suspect we will. Great!!!!!! We get Scully and Butcher, but by that time we have had the b'Jesus kicked out of us, the kids we have already get to feel lower than ever and we're about to off load some favourite sons. Give me a break. One thing we are renowned for in this comp is that we are soft and don't have a red hot go. Well, all I am saying is, we are about too. If the best is available and it is within our control for us to get them on board, then I say let's go for it. ............No more excuses.

RR, at my age, I am well past needing a "Bex". Viagra is probably more likely. As I said, the fabric of the club we all love has heaps of problems. As far as Buckley being a lay down misere for Collingwood, my mail is that Malthouse is over the line................and why would that surprise anyone who has witnessed McGoo's inclination to narcissism and as a result Collingwood's natural tendency to implode. All I am saying is, if Buckley is at all interested, we should at least have a sniff.

I hope you're right, but if what you predict is not going to happen, then, for mine, we need to re-set our focus on our draft picks for 2010. Nathan Buckley has already publically said he wants to coach in 2010. If so, he should be one of our "priority draft picks". And before the naysayers shoot me down, yes Dean Bailey is a great bloke, but in my humble opinion he will not get this current group over the line, in time, before we self destruct. In terms of the $$$$? It would be the best debt management program we could enter. Things need to change in the footy department and soon.