Choko

Cited in his past 3 games! Does it continue to be fines for ump conduct, or can it turn to a suspension (presuming the same classification and not reckless or intentional, of course!)

Yeh, the well-drilled bit is coaching. So is the fact they got exactly what they wanted with 1-on-1's and in isolating Rivers. Also, kick-ins is to a coaching plan. Also, the fact that we had a side in that managed to lay only 1 tackle in our forward 50 the whole game. I find that extraordinary.

Honestly, anyone who is blaming one aspect is plainly playing to an agenda. Guess what? We were outcoached, outplayed, outbodied, out-tackled, out-kicked, out-marked. Collingwood is a vastly superior side. Of course they have a better coaching panel. Anyone who doesn't rate Malthouse as a better coach than Bailey is kidding themselves. They also have a much better and more advanced list and are miles ahead on the "premiership clock". They talked about Collingwood's injuries. We were missing more blokes than they were. Our whole half back line was out. So yes, we were out-coached. We were also out-played. The only out we weren't was outstanding.

I'm not surprised you can't see it.

Well, firstly, the club apologised for the manner in which it handled the issue. So they see how else it could have been done. But I'll have a go. I am of the belief that a captain has earned the right to make his own decision about retirement. By being captain, we are saying he is the ultimate man for selflessly promoting team over self. Therefore, I don't think it was or should have been the club's call. But even if you disagree with that, as I appreciate many would, warning and giving appropriate time and consultation to James that notwithstanding his good form, this would be his final year. We ahve full time list manager, player liaison, all that crap.... it's the least we should have done for a captain. He is [censored] at the club, and rightly so. Other players were and are too.

I think the decision was wrong, but that's besides the point. It was the manner in which it was handled that left a poor taste, morale problems, leadership void, etc....

Yep. To the club's credit, they have apologised.

Yeh, give Rivers a break. We had 40 less inside 50s! They went inside without pressure the better number if 74 times. Warnock might have been useful, but not the answer.

You're absolutely right about James. And if he plays a role in Scully going to GWS, the irony would not be lost on me. There's a lit of posters here with their heads in the sand about the impact of the way we managed our legendary captain. It's got nothing to do with list management, although I think we definitely could and should have retained for a year. It's about the way we embarrassed a captain, hue unprofessional it was and the ongoing impact on morale and leadership.

LOL

Yeh, I think over time maybe.... but in the short term, hardly any kids would have the 31 on their backs, and his loyalty will always been in question around contract time - not saying it should be....

I definitely don't think the FD should drop him when they don't know whether he is staying. BUT if we know he is leaving, he should not play for us again. The whole thing is a real shame, and there's no winners, except maybe GWS. The MFC kids and other supporters can't really get behind Scully.... if he stays, he has done his brand some damage, if he goes, likewise.

Hmm... very interesting... Thanks for that!

I think you are making my point W_J! Fev played well and took the best defender. Therefore took the best defender off Cook, or robbed Cook of the opportunity to play on the best defender as the focal point. I don't hink I said Cook would necessarily be influenced by Fev, but I think you know the type of bloke Fev is!

Watching the game on TV, you can see why the club is filthy on Casey for recruiting Fevola. I know Cook did well, but you just kept thinking how many more marking contests he could have contested and been the focal point for had Fev not been there. Yes, in a sense he may get more opportunity because Fev is there, but I think it clearly stifles his and other young forwards' learning... aside from the type of bloke Fev is....

Well done! They can be enforceable depending on how they are drafted, but not likely in this case

FWIW Heads of Agreement can be enforceable, but in this case there is no way an HoA could be enforced, because of the formal requirements, the fact this is employment and also who would try to enforce a player who didn't want to play with them. So there is every chance Maher is full of it more generally, but he is absolutely without doubt full of it when he says Scully would find it difficult to pull out of an HoA.

It's top shelf! Great find - thanks all. It's like The Onion of football.

Very good... unlikely to challenge and win..... so we would be playing as weak a Collingwood side as we could hope to play.

Seriously, was that one....sentence?

Newton needed no help....

Yes, but you're irrelevant.

Correct

Stef was brilliant last night... Basically beat three of them with very little assistance, due respect to first gamer going going Gawn! His development this year and ability to stand up when asked to spearhead the ruck has been beyond anyone's reasonable expectations. Congrats Stef!

Haha. Thanks all!!! Nah, I have no massive feeling re magpies, although I reckon we will be competitive. I am going to quit while I'm ahead... or as Seinfeld says, "I choose not to race"!!