timD

Someone - maybe AoB - described the best mids as "360 degree" - that their grip of the game and ability to pursue options and work space happens all around them. You can see that with Pendlebury and Mitchell. Grimes not so much I guess.

Well, it is boiled lollies and we are hoping for a footy transubstantiation! I think we need to poach one good mid and bank on the development of kids. Only three need to make it, but they need to make it as genuine A graders. viney, blease, toumpas and taggert have the potential I reckon. If trengove, grimes, evans and M Jones prove to be B to B+ mids, we'll smash it.

Yep. Tell me jack, where do you seen the positives? We've had people within and without poisoning the club, No. 1 draft picks who are poor or who left us at the first chance, a midfield that has been stillborn and two totally revamped coaching line-ups in three years. Our senior players have left us in disappointing circumstances or been keen to get out, our club-saving president has died, the AFL have targetted us because they could and no-one gives two hoots. We are a standing joke inside the AFL media and with other supporters in general. We've won about 35 games in 6 years, lurched from disaster to disaster over the last 15 months and are being told that everything will be fine in time - just like last time, and the time before and the time before. I'm a little over glib one-liners about 'positives', Jack. However, I'm not over constructive discussion about what it takes to be a team (the old idea about a team of champions being beaten by a champion team) and I'm convinced that the MFC will not recruit or develop a star. They've only ever done it by accident in the past. So, it is vital to any success that we get 'team' right, because we aint gunna have the star quality. I'm prepared to look our darkened dawn and ponder about how, given all the failures, we might still succeed. I'll get to the RaRa's when we actually do something other than lose.

I presume that here also must be a level of stability with those players that are (a) highest in talent and (b) best at giving example to and directing of team culture. So until we have a certain level of talent playing games together in the right way, we'll be a ways of being a good team?

good get. Neeld is a beginning coach with one of the worst teams in AFL history (relative to its competition). no real leaders, poor onfield and off-field culture, limited talent, limited experience...and you reckon you know how he is going to get us to play? Let's all be terribly clear about this: none of us know if Neeld can coach. None of us know how it will look if and when he gets it together and none of us know what style will win a grand final with the one exception: that competitiveness around the ground and a team built on defensive principles has always stood the best chance of winning a premiership once its talent has got up and going. And that is where Neeld has started. Neeld has been clear about who he wants and who he doesn't. He has been clear on trying to build a forward structure. He has been clear about the character of people he wants to recruit. Thompson got years to shape a list: he almost lost his job before it all clicked. Let's give Neeld some time: he clearly has direction.

So we begin the year not knowing how bad we'll suck...again. What has crossed my mind recently is the question of when is a team a team? When do they go from a good collection of players to a 'unit' - a team whose cohesion makes it more effective? I'm used to dealing with individuals, not teams. When our senior list is so volatile, when our experience in general is poor, we need to add that being a poor team is also a hindrance. Add to that, our coaching 'team' is pretty new as well. How long is enough for the team to start playing like one - to be able to work well together? How stable does a footy team need to be to be able to function as a team? And then, what are sensible expectations for our team this year?

Ben, this bloke has a clear pro Adelaide, anti neeld agenda. He furiously denied it last year but it was plain. AoB tried to get him to argue facts and this joker just stopped posting. I don't think he is 'typical MFC" - he has a clear agenda that he won't admit to and is using ideas he doesn't understand to back it up.

Robbo, I'm a member of that site and it has got some great stuff. Crickey, there is a spreadsheet with all the calculations you'd ever need about brew construction - amazing stuff. I'm going to take your advise and head over to Grain and Grape this weekend if possible to get ingredients for another brew - sterilisation and temp control are my main worries atm. Cheers Tim

Hey H_T, there is some great aussie beer out now. I really liked prickley moses 'black panther' - I think a black IPA. Very smooth despite high alcohol, strong hops and malt. For mine, IF you like hopped beer, there are three or four to try: the hop hog, the ESB from Hargreaves Hill, the hoppy amber from Red duck and the IPA from Bridgeroad brewers. Craft beer = happy times

Wow, what a rejoinder. Gardiner said stupid stuff. So what. Mick Coglin quite rightly put a lie to rest. So what. Where is the conspiratorial disloyalty Jack implies is present? Who are these people? What have they done? Gardiner mouthed off. That is all. Unless you have proof of more. And you don't, so that is it. It is stupid and disloyal and disappointing. But that is it. If I hadn't raised Mick's comments, no-one here would have even remembered them. Not much there, Blistering. And you reckon I don't get around much? What is there to 'get around'? If you have information about who is undermining the club, then spit it out! Just like Caro - tell us the current director feeding you! And you'll give nothin. Basically, your entire post could have been done it three words: "I don't reckon". Would have been a better post. Now I am aware that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What I now want is substance. From anyone. Jack, where is your " stay tuned" info? A lot has been implied, none of it has been substantiated and frankly I'm pretty unimpressed. Hazy needs to put up or shut up. ADC needs to put up or shut up. On internet forums, it is the only credibility - the anonymity destroys a transfer of reputation which would otherwise carry credibility. What's the story?

Jimmy, I'm interested in our mids and how you saw them today - it is our weakest area. Oh, we also seemed to do well through the centre from stoppages - how? Cheers Tim

I am a beginner in the world of home brewing. I plan to buy ingredients from Grain and Grape in Yarraville and wondered if anyone has any tips about their stock or ideas about successful process. My first batch last year sucked. I then got a voucher to Barleycorn Brewery in Oakleigh. I tried an IPA which came out more like an amber ale and lacked the hoppy punch i really wanted. So I thought i'd start a topic about beery goodness. Please feel free to comment about your own experiences, recipes, tips and favourite beers etc.

Don't be facetious. There is no evidence of a conspiracy. If there is, back it up. Everyone here wants to know. Gardiner has spoken out and maybe prendergast and flack. That is not a conspiracy. Prove the former board has problems with this board- other than gardiner, no-one has said 'boo'. Don't be a smart-alec about this stuff- it gives me the shits. Either back up the "forces out to get us" shpeil or back off. Need I remind you about reputations and how precious they are? And don't try logical fallacies. I've no patience for them.

Where i am going with this is that saying something has to be extraordinary to actually be a problem, and, what Chris may or may not have said, wasn't. you say plenty of stuff like that - not extraordinary, hindsight-driven stuff. No-one's banned you for a year.

RPFC, who are these people and what are they actually doing? Right now we have whispers of a conspiracy that no-one can name, with proponents no-one can name, doing things no-one can substantiate for ends that seem stupid across a period of 6,12, 18 and 48 months. We have a board that has made a decent handful of errors that we know of being defended against a 'shadow' conspiracy that no-one can prove or bring evidence of. AND dissenting voices here are criticised as supporting the nameless conspiracy. WTF? To say that this is primitive and circular is to give it more credibility than it deserves. I'd argue that unless you have something huge, you shouldn't be besmirching the reputations of anyone. That burden of responsibility seems only to travel in one direction ATM.

Jack, I said 'supposedly' because I did not for a minute think that Jimma did actually fix rifts. I think Jimma did a lot of good but to suggest that he somehow magically fixed everything is a fantasy that exists in the mind of some of the posters here. I'd have hoped that you'd remember that I spoke about Jimma being done in his role a few years ago. Great as he was, he was not the second coming. It's sad. I think it is quite apt that you talk about misunderstanding...things are hard to do by text only, who'd have thought? It is naive to believe that there are no rifts or resentments. But are they leading to trouble? As for former board members, I have heard only gardiner criticise us in public. I've heard no others. Sorry, I remember Dr. Michael Coglin cracking the sads at Jimma's invention of a sexist MFC that Jimma personally saved. But other than than, nothing. I'd expect wounds or resentments between boards and have been amazed that so little has been said. 186 could have given rise to enormous media-lambasting of the MFC fed by disgruntled sources...and it didn't. Is there more to come out about Caro and her involvement, with whom and to what degree? I think its' unlikely. Who would know? Those involved have no incentive to speak up. What evidence could we rely on? There are people who left - flack and prendergast in particular - they might have spoken. That has nought to do with club 'rifts' and much to do with man management I would have thought. So again we come to proof. We know there are rifts. We know that they might have led to Caro to being fed something. You've implied Caro is/was being fed info from ex-board members who were close enough to know what was going on and when - enough for Caro's story to have more than just a ring of truth at times. That risks tarring a few (Say Andrew Leoncelli for example) with no clear sense as to who I can rule in and who I can rule out - or what they've said. And it doesn't address things like Caro being told by a current director about the state of affairs which was suggested on this site by a poster whose name eludes me at this time - rumors of a text or email? I cannot remember the specifics, but, I read the rumor here and was amazed that it didn't create more horror. It is the frustration of it all: whom to I trust?

My major frustration with this whole situation is the idea that there are 'rifts' in the club - rifts that jimma suppossedly eradicated. Now, Hazy has come on and launched into people and has been roundly criticised for fomenting trouble and not backing up what he says. Right now you'd be lined up as doing exactly the same thing. You are implying a lot and stating nothing and it is EXACTLY what Hazy does. There is no way I can pick between (a) people who know stuff and say nothing; (b) people who know stuff and say a little; © people who know nothing and spout; (d) people who know a lot and express it poorly. Right now what you are saying is in no way more believable than the prognostic nonsense of WYL, RR, Dr. Who, Hazy, ADC etc. It is no more reasonable than Robbie's pathetic character-smearing of FanBob - you are just keeping a smarter distance. What you are saying is that people associated closely with the club - current and past - are undermining it. Well, I'd think it is reasonable to see you make that crucial difference between yourself and that pack by backing up your claims. One of the outrageous aspects of the tanking issue was investigating us and not everyone else. So, now it would be only fair to apply the same standard to all, wouldn't you agree?

If you apply that standard to yourself, you'd never post again. EVER. Actually, if you applied that standard to this board, no-one would eve post again. Let's face it, if people got judged on the stuff they say, then the race would have ended a long time ago.

We will not compete effectively or consistently until our midfield is better and we are several years away from that still IMO. Viney and Toumpus need time. Kent and M Jones need time to get up to speed. If Blease steps up and we can one effective running halfback then we are off. Until then it will be a grind. At least it looks like our team structure is coming along. That allows us to strongly targets mids again in the next few years.

Sounds like we wasted the ball going forward and that allowed North to control the game from defense. That should be relatively easy to fix i'd have hoped. Is there any news about the blease injury?

I yelled at the tele (reflects my mental state) "go on!" when she said that. Imagine outing a 'source' on national tv!?! It would have been professional self-immolation.

I think it was BS. Caro would not have named names - it would have made her untrustworthy to all her contacts and her cred would have died on the spot. Furthermore, outing the idiot who was talking to her would be good for the club. Gary should have called her on it.

I bloody hope so. I don't reckon it will happen.

So, are we getting to the idea that who we hire, what we look for and how we treat them is important? Really? Does this perhaps place concerns I raised about the Neeld process is a clearer light? This stuff is important. Crap way to find out!

The only things I've thought of this board for several years is that they don't know what they are doing and they treated Bailey poorly. I'm glad to have been disabused of that notion. 186 was less shameful that this farce.