Bonkers

Currently the club is in a stable position, however the club has just made a big decision to give up a cash cow (pokies). Over the next couple of years the club is going to have to raise revenue significantly. The club might be purring like a well oiled machine now but it's going to take a good operator to replace the revenue we have chosen to relinquish. From what I can tell Pert has a good network in the media through TV and radio. I'm hopeful that he'd be able to leverage off that to raise the clubs profile and in the process drive revenue higher. Hopefully he can help negotiate a better fixture for more exposure through free to air games and then raise more through sponsors and the onflowing effects.

If Mahoney wants to be a CEO surely he should be willing to spend some time in the business side of the club rather than just the footy side which he currently operates. I know he has been to uni and has various degrees, but at the end of the day they are just bits of paper. Nothing prepares you to do the job other than being involved in doing the job. He's got no experience in business as far as I am aware other than being in the footy department. I'm all for promoting from within but appointing Mahoney ahead of a candidate like Pert would be close to stupidity in my opinion.

He has an outstanding record with Channel 9, Austereo Network, SEN and Collingwood. I find it hard to believe that there are rumours about his character or standing amongst his colleagues when he has been a successful operator in business for such a long time. On appearances he is an outstanding appointment and the rumours about why he left Collingwood is just noise at this stage. I believe the current board and PJ would do their thorough homework before pulling the trigger to hire him.

Seems like a F#%@wit.

You make some good points. Leadership and direction starts from the board and executive level. Things like this don't usually happen unless something else stinks in other parts of an organisation. Warner and Lehman I've never been particularly sold on as leadership figures. Those decisions to put these leaders in place have been endorsed by higher up. The thing is Cricket Australia just had a review a couple of years ago so it doesn't fill me with much hope that the right decisions will be made for the ongoing good of the game in Australia.

Smith has been playing cricket his whole life and should know better. I find it hard to shift blame, but you are right that there needs to be a shift in the culture.

Well we don't know how much of a collective it was whether it was Smith, Warner and Bancroft or whether it was more than that. It'd be even worse if there were more involved than those 3 as we then have a systemic problem and pretty much no worthy leadership in the team. Smith has to be stripped of the captaincy and at least face a ban. Bancroft whilst he is stupid is not as culpable as smith IMO. I also wonder whether Lehman is involved in this. He will be leaving as coach after the next ashes anyway so won't be a huge loss if he's implicated. Looks like a time of change in leadership & direction whatever way you look at it.

As a CEO what can you really say? He has to go through due process and then hand down findings. He basically said he wasn't happy about what happened and was shocked. He can't go and shoot from the hip, if he does that just makes the sutuation worse. I'm neither here nor there about his leadership but he's between a rock and a hard place on this one. Don't envy him being in this position.

Shaun Marsh named man of the match, not a bad effort considering most people didn't want him in the team outside of the selectors. 2nil to the Aussies with the remaining venues likely to suit Australia. Adelaide was probably Englands best chance to beat us in terms of the conditions being more conducive to Anderson and Broad exploiting swing. 4 or 5 nil looks highly likely from here you'd think. One negative is Peter Handscomb. He's looking very ordinary and a shadow of the player he was when he broke into the team. Maxwell will be looked at as a replacement you'd imagine after scoring 270 odd and 96 in consecutive Sheffield Shield games. If selected in the next test that will give us more options with the ball as he can bowl part time spin. In saying that the WACA is not the best place for spin usually.

You'd think with all the money involved in sport they'd be able to get a camera or sensor system installed. For what it's worth I think he was out.

Yeh I don't see much point in dropping Renshaw either. He's been quite reliable so far. Seems to have a good head on his shoulders for a young bloke. It will be interesting if the selectors are willing to drop anyone else if they have some scratchy form. Probably more benefit with your idea of Bancroft at 6 I'd agree.

He actually played quite a good knock. Second top scorer and if it wasn't for him and Cummins supporting Smith we'd be in strife.

Pretty entertaining and interesting first test so far. There's not much between the two sides. Anything around 200 will be difficult to chase down from the Aussies perspective, especially as the pitch detiorates. It will be interesting to see how Anderson pulls up after the 1st innings of bowling. It looked like he was carrying a niggle and spent some time off the ground.

I can see where you are going with this but he has also been in the system for 3 years? The first 2 years he was injured which is noted.

I think Gaff may be a free agent next year. I get what you mean though that we could use the pick in another trade.

We got a second rounder back. Pick 35 was the Cows second rounder this year.

This is taken directly from the trade radio/afl trade news feed: The future is looking brighter for wantaway Adelaide defender Jake Lever, with Melbourne confirming productive talks with the Crows on Monday. It's been reported all has not been rosy with Crows after the third-year backman declared he wanted out of his first AFL club to return home to Victoria. But, Melbourne football manager Josh Mahoney said talks were "amicable" on Monday, with both parties working to get it done. The Crows then confirmed via list manager Justin Reid there had been some "good dialogue" between the parties regarding the 21-year-old's wishes.

4 Years at $750-800 is what was mentioned on Fox Sports News.

I'd suspect the decision to leave was probably made 3-6 months ago. I don't think the result will have any bearing on what happens after the GF.

He's important in setting up structure behind the ball & provides almost an on field coach. It was noted last year by hawthorn supporters that he was slowing up & beginning to lose his feet quite often. He is clearly slowing up, but he was still good enough to come 2nd in Hawthorn's BnF last year. Calling time on his career after 1 borderline bad game is jumping the gun. He will get plenty of games this year & next year. How he goes in the 3rd year is an interesting question.

I don't think there's much chance of us becoming like north. I'm pretty sure we only have 1 player over 30 years of age? We've been playing as the youngest side in the Comp for around half of the season. If the club can identify players like Hibberd or Bernie Vince I think it would go a long way to pushing this team towards finals. Our midfield is getting close to being complete & will mature again this preseason. The areas of weakness are outside run, skilled ball users & a second ruck/forward ruck. You could also say CHB is not covered off either as Frost is not proven & looks shakes at times, same could be said of Oscar. I'd be happy if the club targeted experienced players in some of those positions to attempt to complete the list. I should add, so long as they don't target a player like Vickery & continue with their ok record of picking up experienced players.

The two kicks by Kent & Stretch were exasperating. I don't know if there is any level of football where those decisions would be the right decision ever. Then the skill execution after the decisions that were made were just as bad. Sometimes I wonder if the players either over think a simple scenario or are over coached at how to move the ball. I would have thought that the decision to move the ball in a certain direction would almost be instinctual at that level after years of training? It's the one area of our game that is still average & has stopped us winning multiple games this year. I'm hoping that some of it can be coached out of them, but I think the club is going to have to really focus on bringing in better decision makers & users of the ball over the next few years if we are going to be any chance at getting near competing for a flag.

Oliver & Petracca are currently averaging over 10 contested possessions a game. They are ranked 3rd & 2nd at the MFC and around 40th overall for the competition. Pretty amazing for young players who have played less than 5 games(grain of salt with Petracca only playing two games but I'm sure it will continue or even get better).

He's had less than one pre season & it was a 30 degree day. It's hardly a concern. I'd say it's a good sign he can get that much out of himself already when you take into account he's probably only trained for 12 weeks as a pro.

I really don't understand this line of thinking. If a player does his knee on day one it's an accident that is unavoidable. MFC recruited Melksham knowing he could be rubbed out for 1 or 2 years & we still followed through & paid the asking price which Essendon demanded from us. Your point regarding it only being a year out of his career is an odd one also. A very good to exceptional AFL player will play 10-12 years of good footy. An average player might get around 4-6 good years in his career & most will probably on average play a lot less. Having one year taken out of his career & not being able to train with the club is a blow that we could have minimised at least. I don't see how the trade can be judged a good one at the moment or glossed over as not a big deal now that Melksham will be out for a year. All these points are without even considering whether he will be a good player for us or not if & when he does get on the field. He has been ordinary at Essendon for a couple of years & if you ask Essendon supporters they weren't fazed to lose him. When I add all these points up it doesn't look like an astute piece of trading, but like all trades we can only view it after the players career is over. I hope for the MFC's sake it does work out, but on the face of it, it is looking like a bad trade.